Value Of Science Essay

Value of Science Essay
3/14/2013
Values
Science is undoubtedly a very important part of growing as the human race. It has improved our lives drastically from the first stone tools, to iPods
and cars we drive. But what is it really that matters when it comes to science? Material things are not the only things that science gives humanity.
Richard Feynman explains his point of view of the values of science, and on how science is used to create things beneficial and afflicting, how the
values behind science are affected by society, and how science affects people. The very first point brought up ismorality. Science is not morally
oriented to do good or bad and can easily do either. Feynman referenced a Buddhist proverb he heard while visiting Honolulu, "To...show more content...
For example, recently we had a large hoopla about stem cell research because of the supposed "farming babies". When in reality, the stem cells were
in vitro fertilized eggs from artificially inseminated parents that would have been thrown away. Those extra fertilized eggs contained cells that have the
capability of creating any cell in the human body, and with the future possibility of growing replacement/repair body parts of patients; it would have
been a huge leap in the medical field. But because of our own ignorance to the science behind it, we effectively closed the continuum of scientific
progress. Feynman wrote a small poetic section putting into perspective how great and complicated humans are, but showing how miniscule they are
compared to the universe. Also, how it is a "religious experience" to have you put into perspective through science itself. He says that artists and singers
won't sing about it because not everyone can understand the science, but the scientists who can explain it.
The last value of science is the methodology behind being a scientist. Feynman explains how all scientists have lots of experience with "ignorance and
doubt" and after time, effort, testing and further degrees of uncertainty, subjects can still are unsure, with doubt, and uncertainty. Logic, data, critical
thinking and reasoning can only be as important of understanding. The understanding of the numerous struggles within science has been
Get more content on HelpWriting.net

Science As Product And Science
SECTION 1 1a. Science as product. The aim of science is to produce knowledge, to understand and explain some aspects of the world around us.
However, scientific disciplines differ in terms of their objects of study as a science as product. Knowledge as scientific based on two criteria:
science as product and science as process l a science as product knowledge that give us more explanations or descriptions. The first type of science as
product: scientific VS non–scientific questions. Scientific questions are questions that can be answered by making observation that identify the
conditions under which certain events occur. And the answers to each questions mast take a particular form that meet the requirements of discretion,
explanation, prediction and understanding. Then, non–scientific questions cannot be observable by observation which is the opposite of scientific
questions for instance: (morality–pornographic). The second type is knowledge as description. Scientific knowledge is by definition verifiable.
Knowledge as description divided into two parts: conceptual definition (in literature review) and operational definition (for using and applied in
methods and instruments). Let?s explain each one of them clearly. The descriptive function of research relies strongly on instruments for observation
and measurement. Researchers spend a great amount of time to develop instruments. Once developed these instruments are used to describe
phenomena studied by researchers (open PH.D

Science Essay
For some people science is the supreme form of all knowledge. Is this view reasonable or does it involve a misunderstanding of science or of
knowledge?
For many persons science is considered the supreme form of all knowledge, as science is based on facts and theories and it reaches its results through
an approved scientific method. Consequently, it seems to be objective and thus more truthful and reliable. However, other persons argue that this is a
misunderstanding of science. Hence, one should question what science and knowledge entail. Can there actually be some form of knowledge that
overrules all other types of human knowledge? Is scientific knowledge actually always objective? Are there other types of knowledge of equal worth?
This...show more content...
Thus, perception, in this case could be considered an important factor that makes a piece of knowledge supreme. One could then deduce that frogs have
these organs and that most multi–cellular animals also have these organs, after having looked and compared a large sample. This is where reasoning,
as a way of knowing, comes into use to make generalisations. And one can be quite sure that this fact is true since it has been seen, and at any moment
in time, if someone dissects a frog, he/she will see these organs. In this example, there is very little room for human emotions/ bias to affect the
perception, since one cannot argue that what's inside the frog's body is something other than its organs.
On the other hand, there are other parts in the field of biology that are less supreme. Consider the example of a field study where a scientist is to
investigate if leaves closer to the trunk of oak trees in Scania are larger than those being further away from the trunk. The biologist will make a plan
on how to conduct the experiment, and since he cannot measure all leaves in all trees existing in Scania, the biologist will have to carry out the field
study on a sample, which raises the question: what could be an appropriate sample? Most scientists agree that the best way to conduct a field study is
being as random as possible. But how does one go about being random? Scientist may have different ways of reasoning on what would make an
appropriate sample, but no way

Essay on History and Philosophy of Science
History and Philosophy of Science
The world of science, as we know it today, is a difficult subject to grasp. So many new ideas are present and these new ideas are not
interchangeable. Some parts do work together although as a whole they don't fully coincide with each other. The three basic ideas that science is now
based upon come from Newton, Einstein, and Hawking. I call these ideas/theories "new" based on what I classify the state of the scientific community
of today. After looking at what is going on in science, it is clear to me that the scientific world is in a crisis state. According toKuhn, a crisis state is
when science is in the middle of choosing a particular paradigm to work under. For scientists, there is a general theme...show more content...
Newton had given the world what we now know as physics. For the past three hundred years Newtonian Mechanics have been taught to every
student aspiring to elevate their minds. Newtonian Mechanics were the end all to the questions that had plagued thinkers since the beginning of
time. The key difference is that Newton was never exposed to the world of science that technology had made prevalent to the likes of an Einstein
or Hawking, or even my colleague studying neuro surgery at John's Hopkins University. When Newton was sitting under his apple tree conjuring
up ideas for how and why he did not fly off into space or why the harder you hit something the farther it goes, technology was moving along at the
rate of most people's grandmothers in their walkers. The scientists that had surrounded Newton knew only of what they could see. Their were no
people looking to the far ends of the galaxies and their were no people looking in to the unseen cells that make up everything that we can see.
Basically, Newton did not have a reason to explain what he was not aware of. He did have quite good reason, however, to explain why he got a
bump on his head from that ripe apple that no longer needed the shelter of the tree. According to Shlain, Newton set the world he knew to mechanics
and set the parameters for the new and final, well what was thought to be the final paradigm of the world. Then in 1905,

Science: Friend or Foe? Essays
Science: Friend or Foe?
Science, a field of study featuring a relentless stream of change and advancements, is widely viewed as both the scourge and savior of the modern
world. It is true that science offers solutions to many problems, suggesting greater convenience, technological improvement, and longer, healthier lives.
Still, science is far from perfect, a point that many critics are eager to vocalize. Science has been blamed for invoking fear, reaching inadequate results,
and supporting the most immoral of studies. Clearly, the opinions and perceptions that people have toward science play the largest part in this complex
love–hate relationship. Mary Shelley and J. Michael Bishop have a tremendous amount to say about this...show more content...
Science is now heavily feared and criticized, the subject of tremendous spite from people who do not understand its implications (238). For science has
been the cure for many of society's ills, adding convenience, technological improvements, and the prospect of better health to incalculable numbers of
people (237). Science, however, still remains labeled as ineffective and inhumane in today's world. These unfair allegations are largely the result of
several unfortunate misconceptions about what science is capable of accomplishing (239).
Firstly, people often exaggerate science's ability to rectify a situation. Science has reasonable limitations, and believing that science should somehow
transcend these limits is largely unfair (240). Science indeed offers knowledge and potential solutions; society, politics, and a slew of other factors
dictate whether or not that knowledge is put to its most effective use (239). Secondly, society tends to concentrate on what science cannot do instead
of what it has done. Science, like any other field of study, is not exempt from the concepts of possibility and reality. People want expedient remedies to
all of the world's (and, in turn, their own) ills, apparently not realizing the limits of science, time, and mankind (239). To combat this reality, the notion
is introduced that science is not good for anything

Scientific Theory Essay
Scientific Theory
A scientific theory is a well–substantiated explanation of some aspects of the natural world, based on a body of knowledge that has been repeatedly
confirmed through observation and experiment. Scientist creates scientific theories from hypothesis that have been corroborated through the scientific
method, then gather evidence to test their accuracy. The strength of a scientific theory is related to the diversity of phenomena it can explain, which is
measured by its ability to make falsifiable predictions with respect to the phenomena. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and
comprehensive for of scientific knowledge.
The scientific method involves the proposal and testing of hypotheses, by deriving...show more content...
Theories are the main goal in science and no explanation can achieve a higher rank. (to the belief that "theories" become "laws" over time). In some
cases, theories can unify. Two or more theories can be replaces by a single theory which explains the previous theories as approximations or special
cases, comparable to the way a theorys is connecting explanation for many confirmed hypotheses: This is reffered to as Unification of Theories. Both
scientific laws and scientific theories are produced from scientific methods through the formation and testing of hypotheses, and can predict the
behavior of the natural world. Both are typically supported by observation and experimental science. However, scientific laws are descriptive accounts
of how nature will behave under certain conditions. Scientific theories are broader in scope, and give overarching explanations of how nature works
and why it exhibits certain characteristics. They are supported by evidence from many different sources, and may contain one or more laws.
Both scientific laws and scientific theories come from the scientific method through the formation and testing of hypotheses, and can predict the
behavior of the natural world. Both are usually well supported by observations and/or experimental evidence. However laws are descriptive accounts of
how nature will behave under certain conditions. Assumption is a

Human Science And Natural Science
Disagreement may aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences because disagreement leads to new discoveries. Disagreement is
about gathering reliable knowledge as well as using this newfound knowledge, and occurs when a group fails to reach a consensus over the logic of an
argument. Knowledge is composed of facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education. Two areas of knowledge that
are impacted by disagreement are human science and natural science. Human science is the study of human behavior and how humans gather
information. Natural science is a branch of science that deals with the physical world. In order for a disagreement to occur, one must be familiar with
the subject and have his or her own prediction that is different from the norm. Therefore, to advance knowledge in the areas of human and natural
science, people must disagree. The roles of logic, reason, and emotion will be investigated to see how they are used to help gain new knowledge in
both human and natural science. Many knowledge claims in human and natural science are based on theories. Jean Lamarck proposed the theory of
evolution in 1801. The theory of evolution proposed by Lamarck was based on the idea that organisms had to change their behavior to survive. For
instance, if a giraffe stretched it neck for a long period of time to reach the leaves as the top of the tree, then a "nervous fluid" would flow in the neck
and make it longer. Thus, its

Reflection On Science And Technology
This course has been designed in a way that makes learning stress–free and interactive. The way this class is being approached with a humanities
emphasis, has allowed me to gather a real cultural approach to science and technology, and how it could be beneficial or even harmful to us if we are
uninformed of its significance to our society. The elements implemented within the course have also allowed me to further my understanding within
each topic we cover, as well as understand how scientific ideas and technological developments are important in social contexts.
Any human created idea can be related to our society, either as a desire or as a necessity.Science and technology should belong to society as a
necessity. As our society has evolved, both science and technology have become an interwoven facet of our day to day lives. Even though the class
is only part of the way completed, I still feel like I have already been lastingly affected by the material. I have been able to use the different elements
in class, such as the reading, class discussion, and blog posts on Yellow Dig to understand how science and technology are connected to our society in
many ways. The incorporation of technology in the form of Yellow Dig, Canvas, and Slack have also enhanced my experience and interaction with the
classroom. Without technology, learning and understanding material would take much longer than we are currently able to do. Our society can easily
take for granted the immense impact

Science And Its Effect On Society Essay
Science is the process which discovers knowledge, knowledge in turn is power, and power is said to bring about corruption. Therefore, through the
transitive property, that implies that science will only lead to corruption. Not necessarily a corruption of one's actions; for instance, science won't make
a politician accept a bribe. However, some would argue that science will lead to a degradation of morals. For example, contemporary science may
lead to a woman viewing her unborn baby as naught but a ball of cells, similar to a tumor, which can be removed from her body with no moral
dilemma. The converse to this is the impediment of science due to humanity clinging to its archaic values. This can be shown by the opposition to
stem cell research and genetically modified embryos in the name of morals and the inviolability of life. The stark contrast between following morals
and advancing science creates a juxtaposition that often manifests itself as a debate between religion and science. Certain members of both the scientific
and religious communities blindly adhere to their own opinions and ideals. This butting of heads helps no one. As a result, a middle road must be
found, one in which neither progress nor morality are ignored. The polarity between these two forces is encapsulated by the differences that Bertolt
Brecht draws in his play Galileo between Galileo and the clergymen. This play, when contrasted with the reality of Galileo's studies, provides a vehicle
to discuss the

Essay about The Importance of a Science Education
Getting a science education in the 21st century can be very beneficial to children of all ages. Science is what makes up the world and the only way
you would be able to know that would be by getting a real education in the studies of science. There are many reasons in why getting an education in
science can be important and three of them are that it makes you smarter, it increases your awareness of diseases going around in the world, and
getting a proper education in science can inspire kids to be scientists themselves. Receiving an education in science is good for children of all ages.
First of all, educational studies in science can really make a student more wise or sharp. When studying science, a person can learn about many things
...show more content...
Everybody goes to school to extend their knowledge, but studying science helps kids understand the world. To emphasize, science can simply make you
more intelligent. In addition to that, learning science can also inform children of all ages about what is going on in the world. This includes diseases
such as AIDS, H1N1, and diabetes. It is important to get an education so that kids know what to be aware of in the outside world. Getting an education
in science can benefit a student more than by alerting them of diseases in the world. Educational science can also tell kids about environmental topics
such as global warming and recycling.. We all need to know about problems on the planet such as these, and what better place than school. "People
everywhere should be aware of the fact that everyday we are corrupting the environment or spreading a disease. (www.grinningplanet.com/6001
/environmental–quotes.htm, John Mckonnel)" It is for this reason that children need to have a good science education. Knowing we are in the 21st
century, things get more complicated, including diseases, and finding a cure gets harder with it. Having children study science in schools can get them
aware of what is happening. Lastly, studying science during a person's childhood years can inspire them to become real scientists themselves so they
can deal with issues that are effecting the world. Becoming a scientist can help the

Reflective Essay On Science
The lesson that I'm going to focus on is really has to do with science for my first grade students. My focus will be to help them gain and comprehend
the knowledge that's needed to while we observe the difference between the sun and the moon, the students will be exploring the difference in each of
the objects, determining which one is heavy or light. They will have a questionnaire sheet to write down any questions that they may have. Giving the
students the hands–on experiences is allowing them to understand even though their opposites, how their still used for comparison. In addition, the
students will have to work as a team organizing the objects, labeling any events that they find and learn their vocabulary words. This lesson plan has a
mixture of a few subjects for them, like Reading, Language Arts, Writing, and Science. This content includes the student's having to ask and answer
questions about details in a text, having to research, prompt and support their answers, remember important details with help from their group, respond
to questions from their peers, be able to write a complete report, and get information or clarity on the details that they didn't comprehend. This lesson is
exciting and fun, the students are learning specific details about the sun and moon, how much their related, but very different in many ways, their
learning how to blend their vocabulary together to help them read and comprehend better and demonstrate their interest in writing to

The Limits of Science Essays
Does science have any limits? Scientists say no. Philosophers are divided in their response. The humanities say that science is not "humanitarian," and
thus not metaphysically deep. In response, scientists and some philosophers contend that science is the best knowledge we have about the world. I
argue that science is limited by its form. Science has no object that derives from the human form. Everything that is incomparable to the dimension of
the human body is reducible to notions that are commensurable to that body. This phenomenologically clarifies some of the most important discoveries
in contemporary science. The Special Theory of Relativity shows the dependence of space and time on the accounting system. Quantum mechanics
displays...show more content...
It seems clear, that Science will never reach an end.
However, my answer is Yes. Science has a Limit and this limit is the scientific form, or the Form of Science. Form is limit as definiteness. All human
artifacts, as defined functional structures (forms) have limits. They can not be unlimited except in the sense of an extensive unlimitedness of a
multitude of uniform operations on uniform objects. Science as an artifact is limited in a deeper and more important sense. World is limited as a
definitenes of Human form. This answer is developed more definitely in my book "Limits of Science," published in Bulgaria. (1) This article is a short
variant of my research.
Man is a form of life. Every living form accomplishes an expansion against chaos; it combats spontaneous disintegration. Man's life world is put in
order in accordance with his form and this order fulfills the expansion keeping the human's form ("The First Order"). Now, how is the scientific
form established and why? Science is "A Second Order." Empirical science is mankind's creation and it is based on the logos as an "archetype" of
order. The logos is doxa, epistema and scientia–opinion, knowledge, science. Empirical science originates in the late antiquity. Archimedes' trials could
be pointed to as models of empirical science.
Science orders the world as a conceptual network (Karnap, Quine) in a "epistemological field." Tensions (or questions) are allocated in this field and
they promote the

The Philosophy of Science Essay
The study of the philosophy of science explores whether scientific results are actually the study of truth. Scientific realism is an area of study in the
philosophy of science and has a contrasting view called anti realism. The debate between the two revolves around their disagreement between the
existence of an external world. A scientific realist believes that an external world exists independent of our minds whereas the anti realist, or the
idealists, believes that no such world exists outside of ourselves. A stick underwater seems bent while railway tracks seem to meet in the distance,
when they do not. Our vision plays tricks on us and therefore the phenomena appears misleading. Seeing as there are doubtful sources to our
experiences...show more content...
Thus creating a world via electric signals to our brain. While the realist accepts that unobservable phenomena do exist and does not consider a theory to
be a fact but merely as approximately true.
James Robert Brown of the University of Toronto is a realist. Realism, as affirmed by Brown, is determined by scientific success, which is best
determined by theories that, first, "are able to organize and unify a great variety of unknown phenomena." (Brown, p.133). Second, latter theories
systemize data more accurately than former, lastly and most importantly " a statistically significant number of novel predictions pan out," (Brown,
p.134).
In his work, explaining the success of science, Brown tries to describe scientific success whilst defending scientific theories by contesting anti realist
ideas. Throughout the paper he mentions various anti realists along with their work regarding the succession of a theory. Bas Van Fraassen, one of
most influential anti realists, suggests that it is not at all surprising that theories are successful, given that any unsuccessful theory is rejected. He
believes that the success of science happens purely due to chance, or coincidence. Fraassen tries validate his view through Darwinian natural selection.
He says that just as species struggle for existence, so do theories. Species who do not adopt to their environment become extinct, "so too are theories
which do not make true observational predictions dropped" (Brown, p.134). A

Essay on Science in Society
Science in Society
Within the last century scientific discovery has been growing at an exponential rate. Evolution, genetics, physics, and chemistry have all greatly
affected the way people view the universe and human role in it. Furthermore, the application of scientific discoveries has physically changed society.
For example, humans went from being flightless to eighty years later having transportation in super sonic jets available. Rapid scientific change has
caused many issues surrounding morality and science to arise. The idea behind the skepticism is that just because something can be done doesnt mean it
should be. Nuclear weapons, biological weapons, and cloning have all fallen under fire due to this concept. People worry that...show more content...
Other phrases throughout the first four pages use words like "nightmare", "destroy", "haunt", and "anguish" to attract readers to how seriously society
takes awareness of science. These phrases get readers to feel the urgency of the views against science in society. The dark phrasing successfully shows
that society has taken a responsible view against incorrect scientific application.
In about the fifth page of the essay, Dyson switches to using positive words to get readers to believe his true stories of success in stopping immoral
science application. He uses words like "credit", "peace", and "finest hour", giving readers a positive feel. This positive feel is reflected into the
reader's opinion about the odds of correcting science. The positive words influence readers to believe success against biological weapons, nuclear
weapons, and other problems are easy obstacles.
Dyson's also convinces readers society is successful in stopping science by using words that show he is reputable as a writer. Dyson writes about a
wide variety of events and novels and describes things with a wide range of scientific words. Dyson does this to show that he is a reliable source. He
uses terms like Citizens Committee, Public Health Authorities, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and many more convincingly complicated
words to showing his

Reflection Paper On Science And Science
Reflection Statement Before taking this course, I had never questioned how to characterize science. In elementary school I was taught that "good"
science experiments use the scientific method so that they are replicable. I had always seen science as a source of reliable information. I certainly
questioned certain findings, but I held the belief that there was such a thing as "good science." I thought that "good science" transcended any
subjectivity and was indisputable. These notions I had were called into question in Anthropology of Science. We started by looking into the history of
science. Throughout lectures, we studied epistemology and different trends in scientific discovery. These classroom lectures were complemented with
discussions of Thomas Kuhn and other scholars, such as Emily Martin and Michael Carrithers, who have theorized about scientific research. During that
time, I personally began deconstructing my image of science being on a pedestal when it comes to scholarly findings. I acknowledged that there
were ways for culture to influence science. When I read the assigned ethnographies God's Laboratory and Alien Ocean by Elizabeth Roberts and
Stefan Helmreich, respectively, I was able to see exactly how clearly the theories about science were visible when anthropologists studied scientific
communities. The connections were even more visible to me when we got to apply the theories ourselves through our Ethnography of Science class
project. As a class, we

Environmental Science Essay
Environmental Fundamentals
Laura Jackson
Env/100
April 8, 2013
JOHN ENSWORTH
Environmental Fundamentals
Introduction
Environmental science is defined as the study of the environment and the interconnecting systems it contains, furthermore, the way people interact with
their natural surroundings and use natural resources (wise geek, 2013). Scientist in this field is highly interdisciplinary and extremely diverse, for
example, a scientist might study volcanoes or climate change. This essay will cover the following; the definition of environmental science, the
relationship between science and technology and how it affects environmental problems; the concept of environmental sustainability and why it should
be studied; how human...show more content...
Environmental Sustainability
Environmental sustainability is the process of making sure current processes of interaction with the environment are pursued with the idea of keeping
the environment as pristine as naturally possible based on ideal–seeking behavior (Wikipedia, 2010). What makes environmental sustainability so
important is that it demands that society designs activities to meet human needs while indefinitely preserving the life support systems of the planet
(Wikipedia, 2010). Human consumption can only use the nature's resources at a rate that can be replenished naturally.
Human Values affecting Society
The most devastating environmental change of all is the loss of biodiversity. The rate of species extinction has remained at one species per million per
year, furthermore, the accelerating destruction of habitats throughout the world leads to projections of the loss of two–thirds of all species on earth by
the end of this century, and millions of years to recover from the Cretaceous period (mindfully.org, 2013). As individuals, we obtain our food, directly
or indirectly from plants, for example, plant our primary use of medicines. Biodiversity also determines the properties of communities and ecosystems,
which capture energy from the sun. The world is less resilient, more homogeneous, less interesting, and with fewer opportunities for our descendants

and ourselves: where the process reaches

Essay on Teaching as an Art or a Science
Teaching as an Art or a Science
Teaching: Is it an Art, or is it a science?
I think that teaching requires both art and science. They both play a role on each other, because if a teacher only demonstrates one of these types of
teaching, their classroom will most likely be very boring.
Teaching as an art demonstrates ways in which the teacher may use creative ways to present the material so it is fun and interesting for his or her
students. Some examples are games, "hands–on" activities, and/ or movies relating to the topics being covered. In The First Year, Genevieve DeBose
gave disposable cameras to her students for a"getting to know each other" activity. The point of this activity was for her students to be creative and learn
Teaching as a science demonstrates ways in which the teacher may use a more logical approach to present the material to the students. I feel this is
the more traditional way in which teachers teach their class. An example of this could be a teacher lecturing their class about the topic being
discussed. I personally feel this type of teaching tends to get boring and the teacher has a harder time keeping the student's attention. I think any type
of teaching need a scientific background or base. By saying this I am agreeing with Robert Slavin who argues "working from a scientific basis helps
teachers avoid the pitfall of subscribing to the latest fad." (Pg 14) Even though a teacher may use an artistic approach, they still must research their
material and know it themselves before they can teach it. Agood teacher can balance both art and science in their classroom. "The teacher who ignores
scientific knowledge about teaching and learning and makes arbitrary decisions runs the risk of using methods and principles of teaching that are
ineffective." (Pg 15) If a teacher balances both art and science, it will make it easier for the students to learn and absorb the information while keeping
their attention span. Although depending on the grade level in which the material is being presented one of the types of teaching may need to be

Ethics in Science Essay
What do you think of when you hear or see the word "science"; test tubes, Einstein, Space? Science is "generally taken as meaning either (a) the exact
sciences, such as chemistry, physics, etc., or (b) a method of thought which obtains verifiable results by reasoning logically from observed fact"
(Orwell). Scientists are those who study science by scientific method. These "men of science", which Orwell describes as "a biologist, and astronomer,
perhaps a psychologist or a mathematician", "work by means of induction and deduction, and that by the help of these operations, they, in a sort of
sense, wring from Nature certain other things, which are called natural laws, and causes, and that out of these, by some cunning skill of their own,
This undoubtedly demonstrations the pros and cons of inventions made through science. There are people who abuse medicine, and other creations
from science, for numerous different reasons. Things like guns and nuclear weapons were formed to protect, but with the downside of killing
others. With all of this this being said, should there be a limit to things we make? More importantly, does science have an ethical responsibility to
humanity? I think to answer that question, we need to start with deciding if scientists have an ethical responsibility to humanity. As the saying goes,
with knowledge comes power and with power comes responsibility. However, there can be no limitation on the knowledge obtained from science.
Instead, we must limit what arises from knowledge and power. What are some responsibilities of scientists and the rest of the population? Well, to
start on the broadest sense, science should only be used for the absolute necessary improvement of humanity. It is our ethical responsibility to not
take advantage of science to further the advancement of military power, as we have done with the creation of atomic and nuclear bombs. Is it
responsible to use science for fame, fortune and glory? No, and it is not acceptable, but it is common for people to do so. If, for some reason, we had
the option to save 80% of endangered wildlife through scientific means, but with the consequence of harming the atmosphere, would it be ethical to
continue on? We would have

Evolution of Science Essay
The idea of a world progressing, or evolving, in science hasn't been around forever. In fact, the Enlightenment period in the seventeen hundreds with
scientists such as Isaac Newton the man who discovered gravity, Louis Pasteur the chemist who invented the vaccine to prevent rabies, Charles Darwin
the father of evolution, Benjamin Franklin the first scientist to toy with the dangers and possibilities of electricity, and so many more wonderful
scientists was the start of the "progress" that revolutionized our world. Of the scientists who progressed our world, few shaped modern biology the way
Charles Darwin managed to. Thomas Kuhn saw the progress people like Darwin made not as truth seeking, but simply as filling in another piece of
His "discovery" had already been interpreted one way, all Newton did was reinterpret the observed gravity in a new way, according to Kuhn.Isaac
Newton gave science the observation of gravity that pulls molecules together, without him, DNA could not be bound to the Universe and molecules
would never bond to one another. Darwin's Big Bang theory relies on the explanation of Gravity through Isaac Newton. With Newton's science, other
scientists made discoveries that built upon his science to evolve the theoretical thoughts of the universe to Charles Darwin's evolution. Thomas Kuhn
believed that science did not build upon itself, but the systematic, rather than random, ways of science lead to paradigm shifts when one discovery was
found to be incorrect resulting in a new, rather than expanded old, idea. When a shift occurs, new scientists emerge with open minds and new ideas
older scientists over–look. These new scientists begin new paradigms and the process of discovery continues until imperfections are found with the
current paradigm. Kuhn believed that the newer scientists did not just build on the older scientists, but spun off in new directions.
Thomas Kuhn believed that Darwin's evolution had undergone shifts. He had many ideas of how evolution occurred and toyed with many of them.
According to Kuhn, changes in beliefs and ideas after finding one belief did not

Value Of Science Essay

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Write My Economics Paper Conway

More from Write My Economics Paper Conway (6)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Value Of Science Essay