In 1936, Phyllis Wright, a sixth-grader that hoped to understand what scientist prayed about, sent a letter to Albert Einstein, who responded to her inquiry with a well-thought-out letter. Within the reply, Einstein used appeals to logos, ethos, and pathos; clever manipulation of the relationship between subject, speaker, and audience; and a well-articulated purpose, all of which made Einstein’s reply rhetorically effective.
During the time that Galileo wrote the letter to Grand-Duchess Christina, there was much debate about the orientation of the universe. There were two different theories of thought at this time. One was the Heliocentric Universe, which believed the sun was the center of the universe and the Earth orbits it. The second was the Ptolemaic or Earth-centered Universe, were the sun orbits the Earth. Galileo faced much opposition from the Catholic Church, and was repeatedly harassed and condemned by his contemporaries.
While the science versus faith argument has existed for centuries, only rarely do they ever work hand in hand. Richard Selzer, author of The Surgeon as Priest, breaks the barrier and explores the contrast between the two ideas, likening them, while breaking his piece into five distinct parts to help himself and the reader analyze it. Selzer uses process analysis, transition between first, second, and third person perspective, a plethora of literary techniques, as well as evocative syntax and diction to explore the conflict between religious anomalies and scientific conviction to propose his purpose, discussing in an almost interrogative fashion - when does zeal become iniquity?
The concept of "meme"--coined by Dawkins and referred to as genes-- means an idea, behavior, or trend that has the ability to spread from person to person within a culture. In today 's world, memes are mostly spread from person to person through the Internet. It can be spread through images, texts, videos, and more. Dawkins claims that "man is uniquely dominated by culture, by influences learned and handed down" (207) , which means that the things you are exposed to throughout your life is what influences you to pass it down to someone else. Dawkins main goal of a meme was to pass down a unit of cultural means that was able to be spread from person to person and to see it evolve. "Each individual has his own way of interpreting Dawkin 's
Critical thinking can help people think more clearly and deeply about a problem. Critical thinking is necessary to evaluate and scrutinize thoughts, beliefs, and feelings. For instance, when people decide to make a decision about religion, critical thinkers will have more skill in making their belief and action more accurate. In the drama Inherit the Wind, Brady is a man who has a strong belief in God through the Bible. Drummond is an agnostic who does not affirm in the existence of God, and accepts in the evolution theory of Darwin. They argue about the belief in God and the evolution of Darwin that Brady calls “Evil-ution”. There are two main logical
In the play, “Inherit the Wind” written by Jerome Lawrence and Robert Lee, Bertram Cates goes on trial for teaching “Darwin’s Theory of Evolution” to his story. This created a major case, where humans challenged God’s holy word,. This started a war against humans and the God. During the battle, two of the world’s greatest mind fought against each other, the defence attorney Henry Drummond and the prosecutor attorney Matthew Harrison Brady. From the beginning to the end, the trial was influenced mostly by Brady’s characteristics, successfully leading him to winning the trial.
Science today is way more advanced than back in 650 B.C.E. and we have tools and scientists that explain the natural phenomena that we still deal with today. The Greeks however had a very different way of explaining these natural phenomena. The Greeks used Homer’s epic poem, The Odyssey, and their gods to explain these phenomena for them. Yan covers these phenomena like Earthquakes which were previously thought to had been caused by the sea god, Poseidon, or that storms were caused by Zeus and that the Sun came up everyday thanks to Helios. Which today are now proved through orbit of the Earth and low and high air pressure. Even though we both had our own way of explaining these phenomena, they varied drastically.
To every story there are at least two sides; for any considered conclusion a fact must have a contradiction. Moreover, arguments follow in tow. Henry Drummond in Inherit the Wind by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee, displays the significance to Creationism and Darwinism in tandem. For either side to appropriately stay considered they must correlate with opposition. For an argument to be substantial and taken seriously, it must have debatable opposition and equal representation.
In Galileo’s Daughter, Dava Sobel assembles an account of Galileo’s attempt to prove the heliocentric model of the universe in a world where mans’ logical reasoning is potent, yet second to his devotion to God, and by relation, the Catholic Church. Sobel writes about Galileo’s tendency to question the reasoning of those around him. Though it may not be apparent, Galileo was born into a world of great similarity to the modern day. In Galileo’s time, Science was seen as blasphemy and a tool to undermine the construct of God. Moreover, it didn’t help matters that at the time, the Church was the governing body throughout Italy. This made it particularly difficult for scientific advancement, as any theory that suggested conflict with religious teaching
Walter Charleston argued, “The creation and arrangement of the atoms can be connected to no other cause, but to an Infinite Wisdom and Power.” This leads for Charleston to believe that the existence of all things could only be created and arranged by someone with high sovereignty, God. When philosophers began to think about their actuality, they felt as if God was their creator. German philosopher, Gottfried Leibniz, claimed that God created the world for humans and their minds. Leibniz stated, “Thus minds have particular laws which put them above the movements of matter…” Rene Descartes believed in a similar concept of God creating natural laws. Not only did God place the laws, but he wanted the part of humans, laws, etc. to play out in the universe based on them. This explains their belief in the creation of the universe in which it could only be made by someone with all knowledge. The role that humans would play could only be contributed based on the natural
Eagleman uses science references at the beginning of the book because he wants to establish credibility with his audience. Eagleman trying to establish credibility with his audience so that the audience is about to trust his words. “Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) liked to believe that human actions came about from deliberation about what is good… No one watered this seed for four hundred years, until the Polymath Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) proposed that the mind is a melding of accessible and inaccessible parts” (12-13). With this quote, Eagleman is trying to prove to the audience that his words are worthy of being trusted. “So why did reductionism catch on in the first place? To understand this we only need to examine its historical roots. Over recent centuries, thinking men and women watched the growth of deterministic
In making the argument for the existence of the Law of Human Nature, C.S. Lewis first establishes the acknowledgement of a few different universal laws that man in subjected to. There is the law of gravity, in which Lewis insinuates that in the eyes of gravity, the body of man and a mere stone are one and the same. Then there are biological laws that correspond with those than an animal has. However, the one law that is specific to man and that man is free to disobey or get “mistaken”, is the “Law of Nature or decent behavior” (Lewis). C.S. Lewis uses inductive reasoning to form this kind of logic by first making the observation that even though throughout time man has seemed to have had different agreements of what they believe to be moral,
The issue on whether religion and science can work together has been debatable for centuries. Neil DeGrasse Tyson in his article the Perimeter of Ignorance argues that science and religion cannot coexist. In his article, the author explains that religion is all about the Bible and the Bible primarily focuses on the explanation of the origin of the world. He puts forth the point that this concept is far different from what science is and that they do not complement each other. This essay intends to prove that religion and science can work together with no issues.
One of the largest debates known to modern man is that between creationists and evolutionists. Is human existence evidence of a divine power? Did humankind reach its current state on the reliance of genetic mistakes? Is it of any concern to know one way or another? 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