4. SCIENTIFIC ACHIEVEMENTS IN THE CONTEXT OF HIS TIME
According to Morgan (1938) and López-Beltrán (1994), the mystery behind human inheritance has been a long problem which began with the Greek philosophers. Between the time of Aristotle and Mendel time, several theories about human inheritance has been advocated for, part of which are the theories of evolution and influence of the environment by Charles Darwin and Lamarck respectively (Morgan, 1938). As stated in history (Mendel, 2015), before the time of Mendel discovery, there has been a common practice of crossing animals to get the best traits and keeping seeds from a high yielded plant to be sown in the next season. However, the general believe among the biologist of Mendel’s time
…show more content…
The work was rediscovered by Williams Bateson, who explained Mendel work in his publication in 1901 (Olby, 2000). Although, according to history there are three other European scientists, Hugo de Vries, Carl Correns, and Erich von Tschermak, who discovered independently from their experiment a report similar to that of Mendel’s, but, much was not said about them after the evolution of the modern geneticists (Veuille, 2000). After the rediscovery of Mendel work, several arguments based on the authenticity of the work came up (Pilpel, 2007). Despite some criticisms faced by Mendel’s work, the findings form the basis for modern science of …show more content…
Part of the conclusion of Mendel of work was that the inheritance of each character is determined by ‘‘something’’ passed from parent to offspring which today is referred to as ‘gene’. Mendel work brought the formulation of what is known today as Mendel’s law. Several questions have been answered in medicine using Mendel theories as the basis of genetics (Williams, 2009). Many diseases are now known to be inherited, and can be prevented from being passed on to the next generation by tracing the pedigrees to determine the probability of inheritance by the offsprings. The knowledge of Mendelism is used globally by agriculturalist and plant scientists to improve or get the desired traits in
Introduction- The discourse community of scientists in the field of genetics attempt to find solutions to problems with genes, and heredity. For over a century, popular articles have played a crucial role by building a communication medium between scientists and their audience who are people interested in keeping up with the upcoming science. These articles have been influenced by changes in the audience, exigence, and constraints experienced by the community. Therefore, by analyzing the changes in the popular articles through the years we can understand the growth of the discourse community.
Social Darwinism and new discoveries of science began to fill the minds of people
Gregor Mendel was the one who created the basic principles of heredity through experiments with his pea plants. Mendel carried out his work with ordinary garden peas, partly because peas are small and
Berry uses an example to support his claim. He speaks about a man named Claude Bernard, a “French physiologist,” as well as inserting a quote,”Science teaches us to doubt.” Putting this quote within the paragraph explains to
As a young boy, while growing up in New York, one of his daily hobbies was analyzing species and sub species characteristics. He developed this habit after discovering Darwin’s writings at an early age. He attended Harvard and attained an undergraduate degree. In Harvard, he objectively studied nature
During the sixteenth and seventeenth century, many scientists had developed a new perspective on the world around them. Scientists such as Galileo and Copernicus envisioned a world where natural phenomenons could be proved through experimentation. Furthermore, the work of scientists during this time period were affected by the approval of political figures, the support from influential members of the church, and social factors that influenced the development and acceptance of new theories. To powerful political figures, scientific theories were regarded as an opportunity to gain power and money.
America’s first prominent serial killer of the 19th century, H. H. Holmes famously wrote amongst his series of murder confessions, "I was born with the devil in me. I could not help the fact that I was a murderer, no more than a poet can help the inspiration to sing." He reasons—in an increasingly morbid comparison—that the root of murder and evil is innate, for nature itself had instilled the tendency and drive into his very being. Nowhere more acutely is this theme simultaneously displayed and countered than in Truman Capote’s nonfiction novel In Cold Blood (1965). In its entirety, through a plethora of narrations spanning the event of the murders and the following investigation, Capote crafts his story of the Clutter family murders on November
Additionally, the book modified my judgments of inheritance. Many research topics can stem out of these inherited defects with beneficial advantages for survival such as taking a part of the G6PD- deficiency gene to cure malaria. Furthermore, studying defects like hemochromatosis, diabetes, or favism may be crucial to taking a leap (and hopefully, landing) in the scientific and medical community. And we end on this quote from Dr. Sharon Moalem himself which very accurately sums up my comprehension of evolution from this book, “If you’ve come this far on our journey across the evolutionary landscape, you’ve probably gathered a good sense of the interconnectedness of — well, just about everything. Out genetic makeup has been adapting in response to where we live and what the weather’s like.
There were scientific findings before the 16th century and there were more to follow the 18th century. Shapin’s thesis covers that there was no specific scientific distinction between the 17th century and the rest of time for this period to stand out and be a revolution but he explains that the Scientific Revolution is more of a process. Shapin still believes that the scientific findings of this time can be considered revolutionary. Shapin explains that “Science remains whatever it is-certainly the most reliable body of natural knowledge we have got” (165) to show that he still understands how important science and the findings in science are to the world and civilization.
Mortenson’s informative strategy was to provide and inform on the subject of history of scientific thought, how it progressed and the effects of it today. Upon first impression, the strategy was not clear and his points seemed random. A good use of visual aids assisted his information with pictures and words, so that what was spoken about was remembered. Nonetheless, as said before, an unclear take away point was perceived.
Although scientist’s work can be displayed as factual, valid and relevant many religious, political, and social factors contributed to the work publishings of these scientists. Religion and religious figures included the extent of scientist’s finding that where made public. A majority of this was due to the Catholic church’s belief in God. Science was a secular matter and did not involve God, which was a problem for the presently heavily religious Europeans. This also lead to the reason of why Catholics did not experience science until much after the Protestants did, due to their different beliefs.
Only the offspring with certain traits that were suitable with the environment survived. This led him to believe that species evolve from a common ancestor because he saw that many organisms had similar traits and that they eventually accommodate to their surrounding
1. “‘The ancient teachers of this science,’ said he, ‘promised impossibilities, and performed nothing. The modern masters promise very little they know that metals cannot be transmuted, and that the elixir of life is a chimera. But these philosophers, whose hands seem only made to dabble in dirt, and their eyes to pore over the microscope or crucible, have indeed performed miracles” (74). —The word “he” refers to M. Waldman, a man who the narrator refers to as “short” and his voice as “sweetest I ever heard”.
They made it quite clear that this conclusion was not a hard fact. They elaborated by stating how new evidence, theories, and ideas are coming forward all the time, in fact almost every day. It was refreshing to see how the authors could admit how their theories in time could be built upon just as they have built on the theories that came before theirs. The next journal was written by Edward C. Prescott.
Absent from this synthesis is the influence of Lamarck, whose Law of Use and Disuse was crucial to Darwin's original theories. In its selective incorporation of ideas and emphasis on genes and the individual, it has recently found itself in a Kuhnian crisis because it fails to explain the roles of epigenetics, group selection, and culture. Today, it seems that these new dimensions of the evolutionary puzzle have resurrected the ideas of the heretofore discredited Jean Baptiste and helped to rally cries for a new, extended synthesis. 4. What is meant by an ‘inertial reference frame’?