Essay on Fame in Djerassi’s Cantor's Dilemma

In the passage from “The Great Influenza,” by John M. Barry, he characterizes scientific research through the utilization of figurative language, organization, and rhetorical appeals. Barry asserts us that a scientist’s notion and beliefs can easily be undermined by uncertainty, while certainty can enhance their experimental views and confidence. Throughout this excerpt, Barry uses rhetorical devices to explain the qualities of scientists that enable them to achieve higher levels of success.

“…drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervor, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation” (Marx, 475)

In his nonfiction text, The Great Influenza, John M. Barry explains that scientific research is an uncertain process. Barry supports this explanation by using rhetorical strategies such as repetition and a metaphor. Barry’s purpose is to prove scientific research is a confident process that allows one to be courageous on the side of uncertainty. Barry uses formal tone with his audience that goes beyond researchers.

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 development of the scientific method in the late 1500’s to the early 1600’s was a crucial stepping-stone in the science community. The scientific method is based upon observations, hypotheses and experimentation. The concept is rather simple, and can be applied to many areas of study. Once an observation is made, the observer can make a hypothesis as to why that phenomenon occurs and can then design an experiment to prove whether or not that hypotheses is valid. Although the scientific method has been extremely useful in the discovery of various things from usages of medications to studying animal behavior, there are still those who question the usage of this tool. These critics claim that since

In his book The Great Influenza, author John M. Barry writes about his opinion on the characteristics of scientists and their research. He believes that science is full of uncertainty and scientists must be able to deal comfortably with the unknown, as well as the fact that scientists must be creative and accept that their own beliefs can be easily broken by their own research. He accomplishes this by utilizing rhetorical strategies such as allusions, references to relatable examples, and a “matter of fact”, harsh tone.

The scientific method continues to be misrepresented in public schools all over the world. Students are being taught that there is a beginning and an end to the scientific method, and that everything in between is protocol and must be followed chronologically. “Ask a question, do some research, come up with a hypothesis, conduct an experiment, understand your data, make your conclusion!” a grade six science teacher will tell their students. “It’ll be on your quiz!”. However, what those students are not being taught is that the scientific method has never been, and will never be a linear process. Scientists constantly revisit different steps of the process in order to better understand the subject matter; sometimes it can take many years to

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.

Scientists do not use their talents to help civilization, they are “Pure research men” who “work on what fascinates them, not on what fascinates other people” (49). They focus on continuing research just for the sake of science and are self-centered. They do as they please without helping society with it’s actual problems, like how the entire island of San Lorenzo is starving and living in poverty. Rather than working on something that could benefit others, the scientists continuously work on research that is not always even necessary. Science also does not care how their inventions effect other people, even if their inventions could potentially be harmful. After Dr. Hoenikker wins the Nobel Prize, the Hoenikker children use the prize money to buy their mother a tombstone and a summer home. John ponders why someone would receive a Nobel Prize for such a damaging invention and thinks, “‘Dynamite money,’ I marveled, thinking of the violence of dynamite and the absolute repose of a tombstone and a summer home” (65). People grant science rewards for creating damaging innovations that are ruinous. Dr. Hoenikker does not think about the harm his inventions could cause because he does not care. This negligent attitude causes the destruction that occurs at the end of the book when it says, “The moist green earth was a blue-white pearl. The sky darkened”, and, “the sun became a sickly yellow ball, tiny and cruel. The sky was filled with worms. The worms were tornadoes” (261). Dr. Hoenikker and his children are to blame for this demolition of the world because they are careless with how they use science. Science kills the majority of life on Earth, all because the Hoenikker’s treat the ice-nine with neglect. Science is irresponsible with how it treats the devastating inventions it

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.

When another scientist is describing him, he says, “he is one of those men whom nobody can ignore. He’s clever as they make ‘em- a full-charged battery of force and vitality, but a quarrelsome, ill-conditioned faddist, and unscrupulous” (20). He does not have the best reputation, and many people want nothing to do with him. He’s known for his “insufferable rudeness and impossible behavior” (19). When Edward Malone approaches him under false pretenses, saying he is a researcher when he is really a reporter, Professor Challenger sees right through him and attacks him.

Bailey Tart Honors English IV Mrs. Joyner 1st Block 16 December 2015 Morals of Technology Ethics of human society are questioned when studying deep into the unknown. People feel that certain things shouldn’t be studied even though the technology needed is available. Also, even though the technology is available, it does not establish the moral right to study a subject. Becoming obsessed with the work and research of a studied topic can cause people to lose sight of the important things in life.

This desire for scientific advancement which Shelley writes about must be similar to what motivates scientists even today. In the

Francis Bacon states in New Organon, Book One that scientists are given divine honors and scientists have bigger effects on the human race than founders of cities, legislators and kings. Bacon paints a very positive picture of science and states that scientists have positive effects on society. Many writers in the late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century wrote works of fiction in contradiction to what Bacon believed. Many short stories tried to predict what the future of science might hold and tried to warn readers against the dangers of science. One such writer is Nathaniel Hawthorne; Hawthorne uses his stories to warn readers about the dangers of science. Heidegger’s Experiment, The Birthmark and Rappaccini 's Daughter, all have very tragic endings that can be traced back to science experiments. All three stories focus on very intelligent and driven scientist who try to achieve their goals at any cost. Hawthorne uses these stories as a way to contradict Bacon’s view and to state his views on science and give readers a better understanding of the capabilities of science. Hawthorne’s short stories contradict Bacon and give an accurate critique of modern science as they show the dangers of science and discusses getting obsessed with science and losing morale, the problems of trying to battle with nature and the productive and destructive powers of science.