Through this query, Oates succeeds in reminding her audience of both their need to give significance to meaningless subject matter and that nature falls into the former category. Her use of quotations on the word “creativity” in and of itself debases her audiences’ self esteem because it could make them rethink how that word really applies to them. Through her mocking tone, Oates dismisses the instigators of the reverence of the natural world. She lost this deference to nature a long time ago she lost through separate and traumatizing encounters with
Author John M. Barry, in The Great Influenza, claims that scientists must embrace uncertainty and doubt their ideas in order to be successful in their research. To support his claim, he first states that “uncertainty creates weakness”, then lists the traits required by scientists (including curiosity and creativity), and finally explains that experiments must be made to work by the investigator. The purpose of this is to further support his claim in order to encourage readers to embrace uncertainty because certainty creates something to lean on, while uncertainty forces one to manipulate experiments to produce answers. Barry adopts a formal tone to appeal to a worldwide audience, specifically those interested in scientific research, by using
David Abram’s book, “The Spell of the Sensuous” is an exploration of the relationship between humans and the Earth. His philosophical viewpoints are biased, which gives the reader room for interpretation and argumentation. In an unknown author’s analyses of this piece, he/she firmly agrees with Abram’s “strong denunciation of the Western worldview” (1), but rejects Abram’s negative views about the hard sciences, and proposes strong arguments for each of those perspectives. The author’s thesis, although intricate and lengthy, effectively portrays the arguments he/she presents in his/her essay.
Emily Dickinson 's poem We Grow Accustomed to the Dark explains how one must conquer their fear in order to see more to the world. The way we perceive things change as we gain more knowledge and experience of the world we live in. Elie
Throughout Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, the knowledge of an existing creator has damaging effects on the creature as he tries to resolve what he views of himself while also having an enraging desire for approval and acceptance from his godlike creator. It is evident throughout the text that Shelley, a woman that did not adhere to the religious practices of her time, compares the development of humans through the contrasting of secular and religious connections. In the novel’s end, through the character of Victor Frankenstein, Shelley makes the conclusion that both a moral and spiritual growth is best achieved through detachment from strict belief practices, which eliminates God and moves toward reaching self-perception. Victor Frankenstein’s
‘Gattaca’ is a strong example of science fiction genre. Andrew Niccole’s film explores a society in which science, genetic engineering and perfection are worshipped and has successfully divided people into ‘valids’ and ‘invalids’ based on a reading of their DNA . This film acts as a kind of lesson for current audience , because it depicts a future corrupted by technology .Gattaca focus on the futuristic use of technology to determine the future of an individual by their DNA extracted from birth and the implications it has .The increased focus on technology has decreased human element.
The novel “Frankenstein,” by Mary Shelley tells the story of a man named Victor Frankenstein, who decides to go against the laws of nature by bringing to life a being constructed with decaying body parts. Victor believes in natural philosophy and science, which leads him to the idea of creating this Creature. Although this novel can be interpreted in many ways, I believe that Mary Shelley is shining a light on the harmful and dangerous impacts that prejudice and assumptions can have on people who are considered different. Shelley may be suggesting that humanity is the true 'monster ' due to its socialized ideologies that make ambition, self-greed and rage fulfilling. Even to this day society is known to shun those who we do not see as equals.
She chooses specific moments of her life and narrates it with her own justification, which makes the novel frustrating to read. Though Kathy tries to hide this through her narrative, the reader still understands how unjust the program of clones really is. The existence of human duplicates serves the sole purpose of carrying organs. It is hard to relate to Kathy’s acceptance of her existence, since the story is based on injustice. The novel is constructed in a way that Kathy has the ability to manipulate her
Mary Shelley's fictional story of Frankenstein and Charles Darwin’s experimental encounters and aspect about methodical studies, personalities and the connection of the individual within civilization are somewhat conflicting of each other. According to Bowles and Kaplan “Darwin wrote in his private autobiography that Christianity was a deniable doctrine and the Bible was manifest by fake history” (2012 ) .Mary Shelley approves Darwin's concepts that God was not the creator of mortal essence. Darwin's perceptive of individuality is equal to Mary Shelley’s view. The cultural fear that underlies much of Mary Shelly’s book was also the fear that Darwin had and that was the fear of science.
In the beginning, Victor Frankenstein grew up eager for knowledge and a longing to learn. He studied diligently and the result was a fascination with life and death, “the genius that [had] regulated [his] fate (pg 22).” . Over his life, he developed a “God-complex” and set out to create life. Frankenstein did so without considering basic ethics and in his mind “life and death appeared to [him] ideal bounds, which [he] should first break through (pg 33).”
These expressions of thought are ambiguous to the reader, which is disappointing since the scientific explanations of genetic transfer were explained in clearly. Although lacking creative writing style, the article provides effective visual aid for a teen audience to be engaged and inquiring to learn more about the issue. The diagram of a bacterial cell offers readers a comparison of bacterial chromosomes with that of plasmids. The cell does not include any other organelles to confuse or distract the student.
This idea emphasizes the abuse of science and technology in the novel that develops when the experiment concludes with Charlie deteriorating back to his original state due to unfinished research. “... humans should not try to attain knowledge, but rather that they should be conscious of the limitations of a purely intellectual approach to life.” (Telgen). Furthermore, this criticism reflects the boundaries of knowledge and intelligence Keyes explores, making a point against the abuse of science. Speaking out against the abuse of science in Flowers for Algernon is Fanny Girden, one of Charlie’s coworkers.
This was especially true when he discussed the argument of contraception. Marquis took his argument of abortion to a level that was not relatable and too cumbersome. After all, not every sperm and every egg will become a fetus. In addition, if you are robbing an unborn child of its future then how would this matter if the fetus lacks awareness? When someone is alive and is murdered they are currently living and are on track for a future.
In her speech A Whisper of Aids, Mary Fisher uses a very clever method of establishing credibility with her audience. When Fisher lists the reasons she was not a risk for the disease that she contracted she establishes with the audience that she is one of them. This is important because of the conservative audience she is speaking to. Up until this point most of the people in the audience would have said that people who got HIV were not like them in order to distance themselves for the disease and create a false sense of security. If someone who represented the majority of people who had AIDS at this time had spoken with this audience they would not have listened.
After reading the essays “The Myth of the Ant Queen” and “Project Classroom Makeover” by Steven Johnson and Cathy Davidson, readers may have spotted that collective knowledge and different systems of organization, respectively, are mentioned in the essays. Interestingly enough, these two completely different essays still have ideas that can work together to address a point: that collective knowledge can greatly impact how effective multiple systems of organization can be. After all, collaboration with others who have different knowledge and perspectives creates a stronger foundation for a system of organization that is arguably sturdier as opposed to one that is built on the expertise of an individual. Take Cathy Davidson’s classroom incidence