Sofia Ordonez
Nicole Bizzoco
Expository Writing, Section NX
18 September 2015
Progression and Regression of Science in Society
Because science operates in a complex social context, advancements in it can affect a community’s progress. Since science is seen as objective and rational, one can safely assume that it provides as “true” of a portrayal of reality as possible. However, the individuals behind the science can have different motivations and alter this perception of truth. The scientist’s own human desires can hinder the validity of his or her scientific progress. Ethan Watters’ “The Mega-Marketing of Depression in Japan,” describes how a drug company is determined to sell their product, even if the science behind it is false. The retailing of the product using tainted experiments created a new market for drugs in the global economy. As such, even though scientific inquiry can bring forth the ability to improve society, it can also be used to the benefit of large-scale companies at the detriment of others.
Being curious about the surroundings can produce the progression of knowledge, but can also create an imbalance of power amongst people. The development of science can begin with a scientist experimenting on a certain subject. Afterwards, other scientists are able to expand on that specific experiment and compare results between them. It is akin to a chain reaction of knowledge where scientists continuously improve upon past theories. For example, a famous astronomer, Ptolemy believed in a geocentric view of the universe where all the celestial objects orbited the earth. However, as time went on, another astronomer proved that the universe was instead heliocentric, or “sun-centered.” The progression from geocentric view to ...
... middle of paper ...
...to help them get their desired results and therefore can produce the development of junk science that can brainwash the consumer. With money and knowledge from science, one can easily manipulate the thinking of other individuals. Unfortunately, society lives in an era where it is acceptable to twist scientific inquiry as a way to get ahead in the global economy.
Works Cited
Spellmeyer, Kurt, and Richard E. Miller. The New Humanities Reader. 5e ed. N.p.: Cengage
Learning, n.d. Print.
O 'Connor, Anahad. "Coca-Cola Funds Scientists Who Shift Blame for Obesity Away From Bad Diets." Well CocaCola Funds Scientists Who Shift Blame for Obesity Away From Bad Diets Comments. The New York Times, 09 Aug. 2015. Web. 20 Sept. 2015.
Pomeroy, Ross. "The Biggest Myth About Organic Farming." Real Clear Science. N.p., 06 June 2014. Web. 20 Sept. 2015.
The article, “Motivated Rejection of Science” stood out to me because the vast amount of scientific research to back up findings and the vast majority of the population that rejects it. Lewandowsky and Oberauer discuss the prevalence of false beliefs in the general population. They bring up the popular conspiracy theories that have either false or no scientific research, plaguing the minds of many. When the majority of the general population believe in a certain theory – like the vaccines that are ‘linked’ to measles, Autism, mumps, and rubella – the effects can be detrimental. The vaccine craze was felt worldwide and is the best example of misinformation.
When asked how he feels about the advancement of science to places that were once notions to be the job of the creator, Dr. Martin Luther King replies by saying, “Cowardice asks is it safe? Expedience asks is it political? Vanity asks is it popular? But the conscience asks is it right?”
The Chernobyl meltdown was one the biggest meltdowns of the decade, the implications of Chernobyl didn’t just resonate in Russia, but the uranium contamination was found all across Europe. Sheep farmers from North Cumbria were affected by the radiation contamination. After the contamination, scientists came to help the farmers who were affected. Our presentation on the article also discussed the broader implications for the public understanding of science and how the deficit model failed in the article. The deficit model was used to discuss the problems with science and the lay people. The public’s negative attitude towards science is because of their ignorance towards it and the remedy was to dumb down the information to the lay people. This article discusses how both science and the lay people were misunderstanding each other. This was through miscommunication and standard view of the public understanding of science which lead to people to initially trust everything the scientists would say.
Organic farming is gaining popular support. This movement might be something relatively new, but the practice itself dates back to the origins of agriculture. Obviously,
Society seems to be divided between the idea if science is more harmful than helpful. We live in a world where humans depend on science and technology to improve important aspects of society, such as medical machinery, which supports the fact that science is more of a friend than a foe. Science is advancing every day. The United States has come a long way with its ongoing developments, giving individuals a chance to improve society as a whole. Not only does the United States benefit from such growth, but every modernized country does so as well. Through science and technology, individuals learn from past endeavors and apply it to present and future projects, paving the way for new discoveries and efficient enhancements
Meadows, H, Donella.. "Our food, our future." Organic Gardening. 01 Sep. 2000: 53. eLibrary. Web. 25 Feb. 2014.
Polkinghorne asserts that “scientists are motivated by the desire understand what is happening in the world.”(551, Polkinghorne). As a physicist himself, Polkinghorne understands the desire to understand the world, even shifting careers to become a priest to better his understanding. Science asks how things happen, and does not attempt to answer every question. Questions asking why go ignored, as if they are not necessary to fully understand the world and the life that lives here. Science alone
...om society. Although Bishop makes no excuses for the shortcomings of science and academia, he delivers an ominous message to those who would attack the scientific community: Science is the future. Learn to embrace it or be left behind.
As time has progressed, a divide has been created between scientists and those who strongly...
Roberts, Paul. "Spoiled: Organic and Local Is So 2008." Mother Jones 1 (2009). https://blackboard.syr.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-3188122-dt-content-rid-8212178_1/courses/33750.1142/Spoiled.pdf (accessed March 25, 2014).
n.d. 10 April 2014. Monsanto. The. Organic and Conventional Farming. n.d. 10 April 2014. Qaim, Matin.
...ific arguments. Second, because of their willingness to contact their representatives and make their voices heard, special interest groups target members of the attentive public, providing all the more reason that they be well informed on public policy issues (see Miller, 1983). To this end, one only needs to look at the staggeringly low numbers for evolutionary literacy in the United States, or the recent spike in measles and meningitis brought about by the scientifically unfounded anti-vaccination movement for an example of the damage scientific illiteracy has on the larger society. In this context, it is evident that higher levels of scientific literacy would tend to increase support for science and provide the public with a more realistic expectation of science and its capabilities.
...ieves that the knowledge is contributing to society. The scientist’s own drive to obtain knowledge versus the society’s need to obtain knowledge differ in the degree of limitations since the society’s moral judgments have more limiting factors on the methods to create the knowledge society demands rather than the artistic or scientific drive to obtain that knowledge.
Generally, science is a hotly discussed and vehemently debated topic. It is difficult to achieve consensus in science, considering the fact that ideas are diverse about even science definition, leave alone the true interpretations and meaning of scientific experiments, philosophies and discoveries. However, these arguments, disagreements as well as continuous trials to find a better reasoning, logic and explanation are exactly what have always been driving science progress from art to art form. It is worth noting that, in Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction, the Author-Samir Okasha explore various way of looking at science via the prism of life by citing a variety of scientific experiments, and providing examples from history of science.
Often, scientists are tasked with the role of providing evidence to support theories or to predict future outcomes based on scientific research. This methods or research are usually accepted in natural sciences like chemistry and physics. This is because unlike social science, they usually use formulas, well laid out structures and methods (Guttin, 2012). However, when it comes to social science, researchers usually work using theories by formulating hypothesis, and researching to prove or disapprove the theories. When doing this, social science researchers usually become advocates in certain circumstances. This paper highlights some of the pros and cons of scientists becoming advocates, and gives examples of when social scientists become advocates and situations where they observe objectivity.