By “different scientists”, the novel refers to Dr. Jekyll and Dr. Lanyon. While Dr. Lanyon is a firm believer in rationalism, heterodoxy and reluctance, Dr. Jekyll embraces the insane, mystic side of science due to this, Dr. Lanyon acts as a foil to Dr. Jekyll throughout the story, while the reader is left to choose which
In John M. Barry’s “The Great Influenza”, he uses figurative language, compares and contrasts, and process analysis. Barry demonstrates that scientists are put through obstacles to be addressed as a Scientist and their duties as one by accepting doubt as a primary function for obtaining well-produced results. The passage begins by contrasting the ideas of certainty and uncertainty. Barry claims that certainty “creates strength” and “gives on something upon which to lean.”, while he explains that uncertainty “makes one tentative, if not fearful.” This gives an idea that there is a sense of doubt when it comes to facing obstacles such as scientist’s research and beliefs. “Scientists must accept the fact that all his or her work, even beliefs, may break apart upon the sharp edge of a single laboratory finding.” These points illustrate that scientists must be able to deal with uncertainty by having the “...intelligence and curiosity...passion, patience, creativity, self-sufficiency, and courage.”, which
In the passage from The Great Influenza, John M. Barry uses rhetorical strategies like: antithetical ideas, extended metaphors, and diction to characterize scientific research. In the first paragraph, Barry uses a parallel sentence structure of an antithetical idea when discussing Certainty versus Uncertainty, he uses Certainty versus Uncertainty to intensify the words in the next paragraph. "Certainty creates strength. Certainty gives one something upon which to lean. Uncertainty makes one tentative if not fearful...even when in the right direction, may not overcome significant obstacles" (Barry).
The rhetorical devices imbue the text with power by describing the intricate parts of the scientific method and how it affects scientists greatly. These rhetorical devices also make the text beautiful and easier to connect with by including imagery of the unknown wilderness and nature, which relates with scientists and their studies. Being a scientists and delving into scientific research is a difficult task and it requires not only scientists, but also the every day person to be the torch bearers of discovery as
Scientific research is methodical. Created from a desire to make the unknown known, the “scientific method” was created in the 15th century based on common sense. As Barry analysis the scientific process, he says that the unknown must be made into a tool, even against one’s own ideas and beliefs. However, that concept is tenuous, so Barry uses logical situations to present the idea. In the first paragraph Barry begins by listing the differences of the strength and conviction of certainty with the weakness and fear of uncertainty to better define “uncertainty”.
In his insightful essay, “Do we care what’s true? Does it matter?,” Carl Sagan beautifully and respectfully asserts the importance of favoring science over pseudoscience, and makes clear his argument as to why not the other way around. Sagan believes in the rhetorical connection between author and audience, which is why he maintains understanding throughout the essay. Sagan’s compassionate tone informs his polite authority, which in turn
John M. Barry addresses his feelings about scientists and their research through the piece from, “The Great Influenza,” an account of the 1918 flu epidemic. He adopts a speculative tone and utilizes rhetorical strategies such as fallacies, metaphors, and word choice to characterize scientists research. Barry describes the positive mind set and the requirements to be a scientists. The requirements of being a scientist would not only be, “intelligence and curiosity,”but to also to be open minded and to have courage. Berry uses an example to support his claim.
John M. Barry includes an allusion to Lewis Carol 's novel, Through the Looking Glass, to explain how successful scientists gain their research from exploring the unknown. Within Barry 's use of allusion, scientists are meant to represent the character of Alice. Alice wanders through the looking glass into a world that is foreign to her, just as scientists venture through the unknown in search of a breakthrough or conclusion. Both Alice and the scientists are brave enough to make the journey into this alternate universe in search of the knowledge they do not currently obtain. Barry exemplifies how important it is that a scientist should be courageous when it comes to his or her work by stating, "A single step can take them through a looking
He introduces the reader to the main themes in pseudoscience and key scientific terminology, methodology and statistical analysis, all of which is well illustrated with a wide range of evidence to strengthen his argument and aid the understanding of bad science vs good science. Examples of evidence are used to show what not to do, and he celebrates those that make a positive difference in the field, such as The Cochrane Collaboration. He provides examples of disturbingly unethical practice (especially seen in the newly added chapter 10) that is “baffling and terrifying” (p.192) and shocking, eye-opening information about how the mistakes and misinterpretations can have a very real and upsetting impact on people. Goldacre is fiercely passionate about the delivery and interpretation of reliable scientific experiments and research, and refers to the role of the media and the pharmaceutical and vitamin industries in promoting unreliable and unscientific nonsense for their own financial
Many science writers tend to be boring and give straight facts and knowledge, but Gleiser speaks more simply and appeals to those who are not necessarily as educated. The Aristotelian proofs of logos, ethos, and pathos stand for logical, credible, and emotional appeals. They are a filter through which Gleiser’s arguments can be analyzed for effectiveness. Logos Logos, as previously stated, refers to an argument’s logical appeal. As an established member of the scientific community, it is only logical for Gleiser to utilize logos in his articles.