In The Dark Side Of Science Book Review

He portrays scientific research as dangerous by declaring that a “single step can also take one of a cliff.” This further emphasizes the courage prerequisite to scientists and hearkens back to the fear of the unknown. The fact that all of one’s work may be dashed into pieces by a single finding in the laboratory conveys the tenacity of researchers. Barry’s description of the process by which a scientist decides which “tools” are appropriate to the task at hand, exemplifies the tedious and often inglorious labor involved in most scientific research. Barry finally predicts that if a scientist is successful a “flood” of colleagues and others will “pave roads” over the paths so painstakingly laid, taking one within minutes to the very place the scientist spent so long searching for. This suggests that in the wake of major discovery, the actual pioneer of this breakthrough may be forgotten. Countless researchers have made valuable contributions to the human understanding of the world, and faded into obscurity over the course of the history of science. Barry’s conceit conveys the fact that, like exploring uncharted wilderness, scientific research can be both treacherous and thankless, but all the more noble for

47). The supposedly medical nature of these studies, with the corresponding chance for advancing the health of the human species, is overcome by the fact that “animal models have questionable accuracy” (Singer, Animal Liberation, p. 58). A particularly chilling take-away from the studies Singer lists is that most of them end with a note along the lines of ‘further experimentation necessary’, implying that the researchers are involved in a self-fulfilling negative cycle where their personal pursuit for grant money, publication in peer reviewed journals, and the elusive accolades of their colleagues far overshadows the immense amount of suffering their studies are causing. Indeed, Singer presents his argument in a convincing format, with one account surpassing the next in its sheer lack of consideration for animals as living creatures. This reinforces his argument that humans are speciesists, prone to causing harm to non-humans without a thought if it means a slight (perceived) enhancement in their own state.

Smith, Wesley J. “The Grim Good of Animal Research.” Scientific Research, edited by Sylvia Engdahl, Greenhaven Press, 2015. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints In Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/EJ3010948220/OVIC?u=scschools&sid=OVIC&xide9245e81. Accessed 26 Apr. 2018. Originally published in www.firstthing.com, 18 Oct.

Barry opens his nonfiction text by emphasizing that certainty is a confident resilience while uncertainty produces frailty, but in a way that sends out opposite outcomes. He enhances this purpose by constantly using repetition with the word uncertainty to amplify how scientific research is an uncertain apparatus. By way of illustration,

There is perhaps no current problem of greater importance to astrophysics and cosmology than that of "dark matter". The controversy, as the name implies, is centered on the notion that there may exist an enormous amount of matter in the Universe that cannot be detected from the light that it emits. The evidence of dark matter is from the motions of astronomical objects, specifically stellar, galactic, and galaxy cluster/supercluster observations.

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.

This book really leads me to consider some important and essential issues in scientific research. In my point of view, the first theme of the book is the morality and ethical issue. As we all know, under the today’s regulation and laws, the right

The central ethical dilemma of many of the films and stories we looked at this semester hinged on the question of whether or not man should employ his knowledge of genetics and science to engineer or revive a species that had become extinct, usually due to natural processes. As a science major myself, it was interesting to explore these themes and the scenarios presented in each individual piece of literature. Questionable ethics run rampant in stories such as Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Jurassic Park. “None but those who have experienced them can conceive of the enticements of science. In other studies you go as far as others have gone before you, and there is nothing more to know; but in a scientific pursuit there

Much credit should belong to scientists for making important technological and medical discoveries in the world. In Bishop,'sEnemies of Promise," well known scientists point out views regarding their belief in science. Representative George E. Brown, Jr., who has been trained as a physicist admits that "his faith in science has been shaken." He feels that as our knowledge of science increases, so do the occurrence of social problems. Brown, Jr. Feels that the progression of science should lead to diminishing social problems rather than an increase.(238) The real question is, is science to blame, or are the humans creating science to blame? Critics such as Brown and Lamm "blame science for what are actually the failures of individuals to use the knowledge that science has provided." Frankenstein, The Modern Prometheus, is a good example of a myth about a scientist who took science to an extreme.

John M. Barry's ///The Great Influenza///, about the 1918 flu epidemic, explains how as well as why scientists commit to their calling. By the end of the excerpt, Barry, through his words, bases the nature of scientific research on uncertainty, which requires diligence, risk, and exploration out of exceptional scientists. Using rhetorical strategies, Barry characterizes scientific research as mysterious and dangerous, a research done by scientists who are pioneers, in a figurative sense.

Under the research of J. Michael Bishop, Science is being defended and explored for positive and negative out comes in the past years, to form an argument against the critics who believe science is no longer the answer. Throughout the article I discovered quality examples that support claims of ethos, pathos, and logos. Logos being the most reoccurring from of argument that Bishop chose, in my opinion reveals a stronger argument rather than one that has an argument revolved around pathos.

Edward O. Wilson is a contemporary scientist and, though he may deny this claim out of modesty, a brilliant satirist. In his book The Future of Life (2002), Wilson satirizes the language of two groups on opposing ends of the environmental spectrum. In this satire, Wilson brilliantly outlines the unproductive nature of these groups in their discussions.

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.

Denis Diderot once said, “There are three principal means of acquiring knowledge... observation of nature, reflection, and experimentation. Observation collects facts; reflection combines them; experimentation verifies the result of that combination.” Denis Diderot discusses the overall way to obtain information. When wanting to know statistics, numerous experiments need to be performed in order to provide accurate results. Through the abundant of experiments performed, human experimentation is one of those tests. Upon hearing the words “human experimentation,” individuals automatically assume grotesque, immoral, and unethical tests being conducted on people. However, this is untrue because experimenting on humans is beneficial to the citizens

‘The Ultimate protection against research error and bias is supposed to come from the way scientists constantly test and retest each others results’ – To What extent would you agree with this claim in the natural and human sciences.