Analysis Of The Great Influenza By John M Barry

The book “The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History, written by John M. Barry, covers the progression of the Spanish influenza, especially in the United States. Barry focuses not only on the influenza itself, though, but also on the social influences that allowed the virus to flourish. The book covers how medical practices in the United States had risen up just in time to combat the virus, but, due to societal issues and the war, the doctors struggled in areas where they should have been successful.

Bronowski, J. (2012). Science. In The Norton reader: An anthology of nonfiction (13th ed., pp. 886-889). New York: W.W. Norton

Fahnestock investigates how original science writing is primarily devoted to presenting facts and assumes the audience has relevant background knowledge and understands the significance. Conversely, accommodated writings shift the genre to become epideictic and thus neglect addressing facts, instead focus on emphasizing the importance of a discovery. One reason Fahnestock provides for the shift in genre is in order for an audience to realize the significance of a discovery accommodators must ensure the audience is able to accept a fact and align it according with existing beliefs. To ensure they are successful, Fahnestock argues that accommodators rely on

John M. Barry, the author of The Great Influenza, writes about scientists and the obstacles they face. He claims that scientists are explorers in the wilderness that is science. There is no charted path to go down and no one to follow. Scientists will always be uncertain, however scientists should possess certain characteristics to overcome the doubt. He appeals to our emotions to explain the necessary characteristics a scientist has to posses. John M. Barry uses anaphoras, motifs, and pathos in his definition of what scientists do.

The quote delivered by the intelligent and insightful John M Barry states, “To be a scientist requires not only intelligence and curiosity, but passion, patience, creativity, self-sufficiency, and courage” (Barry 5). Scientists endure a great amount of adversity than most people think. They have to retain a wide variety of skills to assist them in different circumstances that form in their laboratory. Scientist need to have persistence, so that when they fail, they will be willing to try again. As well as, acceptance to come to terms with the fact that an experiment turns out the opposite of their theory. In John M Barry’s passage,“The Great Influenza” he utilizes direct diction and powerful punctuation to characterize scientific research.

In John M. Barry’s “The Great Influenza” he states, “All real scientists exist on the frontier”(Barry 23). During the 1918 influenza epidemic Barry wrote “The Great Influenza” to describe the research that was happening revolving influenza. He describes different characteristic the scientist had to have researching the flu. He recognized the challenges that came with it. He also believes that if you are a scientist that you must be courageous to accept the uncertainty that comes with the job. “The Great Influenza” written by John M. Barry utilizes metaphors and descriptive diction to analyze the characteristics regarding scientist.

Brilliant author, John M. Barry, once proclaimed, “Uncertainty makes one tentative if not fearful, and tentative steps, even when in the right direction, may not overcome significant obstacles… It is the courage to accept—indeed, embrace—uncertainty” (Barry 3-5 & 9-10). These quotes can be traced back to John M. Barry’s passage of “The Great Influenza,” where he writes an account about the 1918 flu epidemic that struck the world. In his account, he goes into further explanation about the rigors and fulfillment of being a scientist, and simultaneously, discusses the tedious process of their research. Ultimately, society is educated that the life of a scientist should not be absolute, but it should consist of persistence and courage. In John M. Barry’s “The Great Influenza,” the author employs innovative metaphors and unique rhetorical questions to portray scientific research.

Attention Getting Device: John Barry, in his writing, The Great Influenza, he states, “To be a scientist requires not only intelligence and curiosity, but passion, patience, creativity, self-sufficiency, and courage. It is not the courage to venture into the unknown. It is the courage to accept — indeed, embrace — uncertainty” (Barry 2). During all eras of time, scientists have endured enormous amounts of adversity. Scientists have had to maintain a wide variety of skills in several different areas to assist them in different circumstances that they endure. Scientists must have persistence, due to their main activity being trial and error. This means that once they have failed, they most certainly have to be willing to try it again. A scientist also must posses acceptance, as there will be times when they receive results that are not their predictions. Scientist must obtain acceptance to come to terms with the results found in their laboratory. In John Barry’s The Great Influenza, he utilizes metonymy and rhetorical questioning to characterize scientific research.

In the early 1900’s medicine was making some steps closer into some great improvements for health and better understanding of the human body. Doctors with sufficient knowledge of the human body and cures for diseases and viruses were scarce. People were much more concerned with government and politics, than health and medicine, until one of the greatest and most grotesque lethal pandemics that’s struck the earth in human history. This pandemic the “Spanish Flu” spread so rapidly and had an extremely high mortality rate. This was caused by the close contact of humans and poor cleanliness and sanitation, and the host (virus) and the body taking harsh action

The book The Great Influenza by John Barry takes us back to arguably one of the greatest medical disasters in human history, the book focuses on the influenza pandemic which took place in the year 1918. The world was at war in the First World War and with everyone preoccupied with happenings in Europe and winning the war, the influenza pandemic struck when the human race was least ready and most distracted by happenings all over the world. In total the influenza pandemic killed over a hundred million people on a global scale, clearly more than most of the deadliest diseases in modern times. John Barry leaves little to imagination in his book as he gives a vivid description of the influenza pandemic of 1918 and exactly how this pandemic affected the human race. The book clearly outlines the human activities that more or less handed the human race to the influenza on a silver platter. “There was a war on, a war we had to win” (Barry, p.337). An element of focus in the book is the political happenings back at the time not only in the United States of America but also all over the world and how politicians playing politics set the way for perhaps the greatest pandemic in human history to massacre millions of people. The book also takes an evaluator look at the available medical installations and technological proficiencies and how the influenza pandemic has affected medicine all over the world.

Grinnell explains that when scientists make a discovery, they cannot claim it as a scientific fact until they have convinced the scientific community of its legitimacy; therefore, a discovery that has not entered the second conversation of Grinnell’s cyclical model is only a proto-scientific claim. This distinction is an extension of Grinnell’s argument regarding subjectivity and inter-subjectivity. Furthermore, when a scientist make a discovery, it is deemed as proto-scientific since its interpretation could have been influenced by the scientist’s subjective experience; however, once the scientific community inter-subjectively agrees on the legitimacy of the claim, it becomes scientific. Credibility is the process by which this transformation

Science plays an integral role in the development and findings of many great things that we can benefit from. Integrity along with a specific set of moral standards must always be followed in order to ensure the end result enables a healthy environment for all whom wish to benefit from such studies. Integrity must always play and be the most essential key role in scientific research. In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1831) and Stevenson’s The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1886) one is able to conclude that integrity must be maintained while conducting scientific research as a lack of can result in the creation of monsters.

“There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry. There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors. Our political life is also predicated on openness. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it and that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. And we know that as long as [we] are free to ask what [we] must, free to say what [we] think, free to think what [we] will, freedom can never be lost, and science can never regress.”

In The Economist’s article, “Let’s Just Try That Again” (2016), the anonymous author claims that meticulous retesting of previous experiments is a vital part of the scientific process, and though it has been neglected over the years, it could be experiencing a renascence. He or she supports their assertions by introducing an upcoming scientific journal dedicated to rechecking old studies, explaining the reasons the act of verification fell into obscurity, and showing the failings of previously unchecked experiments. Their purpose is to bring the matter to their readers attention in order to stimulate further interest and discussion on the topic. The author displays an excitement and hopefulness towards the future of scientific research as well

According to D.B. Resnik (2011), public trust is a common theme in the scientific field. Unfortunately, Resnik believes public trust in research has been used so extensively that its meaning has been diminished. The idea of public trust is important but its meaning may be too broad. Resnik's essay was written to help confine the term when discussing scientific research.