Critical Thinking Blog Post #9

Over the course of this semester I have learned a few things about science and the humanities relating to one another.  I must admit that I had no clue what this course entailed when I registered for it.  All I knew was that I needed it to graduate.  I was pleasantly surprised to discover that this course had a chock full of interesting material like reading non fiction novels based on sciences- (Einstein's Dreams, Frankenstein).  Indeed my thinking about science and technology has changed in a way that I appreciate it more than ever and will pay more attention to it in the future.  I am more aware of the dangers that go along with science and technology.  I'm glad that I now know about the growing problem of e-waste because it will perhaps prevent me from continuously buying the latest, unnecessary gadgets on the market.  I've learned that making connections between science and the humanities helps me to understand science much more than before.  Before LIB 200 I was more of a humanities person, and I still am.  But I feel less intimidated and more curious about science and technology after taking this course.  I feel more pessimistic about science and technology because with new discoveries often comes perils.  We can see such a case with the most recognized scientist in the world, Albert Einstein for his famous equation E=mc squared.  Because of his work, the atomic bomb was able to be created.  The atom bomb is an extremely dangerous nuclear weapon and is capable of killing masses.  After this causes a lot of chaos in the world, Einstein feels very guilty for what his work has created.  I think the blog assignments were beneficial to understanding the readers better because they forced you to read.  It would be difficult to write a blog about a reading you didn't read!

Critical Thinking Blog Assignment #8

There are many different scientists specializing in many different things. There are physicists, cytologists, geneticists, and microbiologists, just  to name a few.  The sole purpose of a scientist's work is to improve the conditions of humanity through discoveries, inventions, and medicine.  There can be many awe inspiring and positive outcomes from the work of a scientist.  Take Albert Einstein for example.  His greatest achievement by far was E=mc squared.  This changed the way people viewed physics and also contributed led to the discovery of other theories such as The Big Bang Theory and black holes.  However, scientific progress does not always go according to plan.  Scientists can occasionally do the opposite for humanity without intention.  This was also the case with Albert Einstein.  He advised President Franklin D. Roosevelt of uranium's ability to compose an atomic bomb which would cause fear amongst the world during the Cold War.  It was terrifying to know that it was possible for such disastrous and immense bombs to be created.  Later on in his life, Einstein became overwrought with feelings of guilt for his contribution in the atomic bomb.  This proves that scientific progression is not always intended and can lead to harmful consequences.

We can also see the dangers of scientific progression in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.  Dr. Victor Frankenstein was a scientist in this novel who studied chemistry and philosophy.  His creation was a monster which he composed by putting several dead body parts together.  The monster eventually killed innocent people, one being Dr. Frankenstein's brother.  By overstepping limits in creating a monster into dead body parts,  the progress of science did not move foward and create positive reactions as it is intended to do.

Assignment #7- Rosalind Franklin

Scientist and X-ray crystallographer Rosalind Franklin has assisted the world in understanding how DNA plays an extremely significant role in genetics.  However, Franklin did not gain the recognition she deserved in her contributions to the discovery of the double helix structure of DNA. In 1953 she used her expertise in X-ray diffraction to discover images of DNA.  This brought her to the finding of the double helix structure which would play a vital role in the determination of one's hereditary genes and how information is passed from a parent to their child.  This is very important for us today and always will be because we have a better understanding of why we have certain physical features,  where we acquire our personality traits, medical history, etc. Unfortunately, Rosalind Franklin's discovery went un-recognized and served as the basis for Watson and Crick's hypothesis.  Because Rosalind Franklin was a female scientist in the 1950's, she struggled to be taken seriously in her work due to her gender.  Even after her death, she still went unnoticed in contributing to the discovery of the double helix in DNA.  In 1962, Watson and Crick, both men, received the Nobel Prize "for their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material".  We get the idea that during Rosalind Franklin's career, she was an angry, bitter woman.  She must have been well aware that she would never get the credit she deserved as a scientist and would never be viewed as an intelligent scientist, capable of the same work a man could produce.  Thus, this hardened her personality in the field.  Evidence of Franklin's demeanor and the conflicts she had with male scientists are shown in the graphic novel of our class coursepack.  It is very unfortunate that Rosalind Franklin was not acknowledged of her crucial work in the double helix structure in 1953.  Nor was she awarded the Nobel Prize along with her associates Watson and Crick.  Rosalind Franklin was a brilliant woman and deserved  appreciation for her work.  Some may disagree as to why she was downplayed, but it's a shame that she was discriminated.

Assignment #6

I chose to do my research paper on the portrayal of science in the fictional novel "Einstein's Dreams".  I found many different sources of research, including two print books.  I made good use of my Laguardia student ID card to access the library and its resources.  This is where I recovered to print sources, "The Universe and Dr. Einstein" and "Time and the Physical World".  "The Universe and Dr. Einstein" written by Lincoln Barnett was published way back in 1948.  The book discusses famed nobel prize winning scientist Albert Einstein and his theories.  Barnett explains Einstein and his theory of relativity, his research on the ruling factors of the universe, and what led him to his theories.   This is all written clearly, yet intellectually.  This book gave me a better understanding of Einstein's theories which helped me relate them to the novel "Einstein's Dreams".  My second source from the laguardia library is "Time and the Physical World" written by  Richard Schlegel.  This book notes relativity, space, time, and gravity.  Albert Einstein's theories are explored, with the main focus on relativity.  For my research paper, I used Schlegel's book to relate the to the scientific laws to the fiction in "Einstein's Dreams" and to explain the concept of time.

Assignment #5 Prompt #2

When it comes to humanistic values like altruism and generosity, I agree that Darwinism always opposes these concepts.  He proposes his theory of natural selection in "Origin of Species" which is the process  where organisms that are best suited to their environment survive and pass on their genetic characteristics in increasing number to succeeding generations while organisms that are less adapted tend to be eliminated.  Richard Dawkins agrees with Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection and that as human beings, we are born with what Dawkins calls the "Selfish Gene".  He believes that it is in our nature to be inclined to support ourselves and those who possess similarly related DNA.  He proposes that genes are driven to cooperate amongst eachother and have no desire to perform any acts of altruism for anyone with unrelated genes. Dawkins states, "Natural selection therefore sees to it that gangs of mutually compatible-which is almost to say cooperating- genes are favoured in the presence of each other."  This may sound like acts of altruism for the same/replicas of the genes because they are in some ways performing good deeds for eachother sort to speak, however, this is gene selfishness.  A selfish gene, according to Richard Dawkins, "is trying to get more numerous in the gene pool.  Basically it does this by helping to program the bodies in which it finds itself to survive and to reproduce."  Therefore, biologically,  we as humans do not seek to behave in an altruistic manner towards those absent of the same genes.  We can observe this behavior at it's best in the short fictional story "Us or Me" by Ian McEwan.  When faced with a dilemma on a windy afternoon, several men had proven that it is human nature to be selfish and non altruistic with those not related in terms of genes. A young boy in a hot air balloon was slowly but surely, drifting away into the sky and the men had made attempts to save the boy.  However these attempts were in vain, because the higher in the sky the balloon became, the more selfish as a group the men became.  Each man was destined to let go of  the hot air balloon because according to the narrator of "Us or Me", letting go is in our nature.  And we all bear the selfish gene.  Both these texts support the idea that Darwinism opposes humanistic values like altruism and generosity. It is simply not human nature to self sacrifice for those who do not possess genes that are akin.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

Critical Thinking Blog- Assignment #3

Picking a Reasearch Topic-I have a few ideas, but nothing set in stone yet.

1.  I have always been curious about scientist Stephen Hawking.  I've heard a thing or two about him, for instance how he is disabled to the point where he cannot produce his own speech or ambulate, and has written several brilliant books and lectures about the great questions of the universe. I think as human beings it is important for us to understand the universe-how it functions,when it began etc. I've honestly always been a bit intimidated by science, so I haven't thoroughly explored and researched Hawking and his ideas.  Our LIB 200 research paper gives me the opportunity to conduct my own research on Stephen Hawking, his discoveries, and challenges he may have faced during his career.

Professor Hawking, physicist and cosmologist takes on zero gravity aboard specially designed plane. His next goal is to travel into space to encourage space colonization.  Hawking believes, "the human race doesn't have a future if it doesn't go into space".
As debilitating and restricting Stephen Hawking's disease has on his life, he continues to inspire and provide us with thought provoking ideas about the universe and our existence
2.  Research Paper Idea #1 may be a good choice for me because it involves a 'close reading' and analysis of a literary work that uses science or technology.  I very much enjoy reading a good piece of literature, and as mentioned in idea #1, anything scientific tends to confuse me.  I already have a decent idea about Richard Dawkins's theory of The Selfish Gene and I have read the short story Us or Me, because I used these sources to write the "Portraying Science and Technology" essay.

Assignment #2 Popular Science

Popular science is everywhere these days. And it has replaced the true meaning of science and it's importance to understanding the world and how it functions around us.  New York Times writer Edward Rothstein explores this development, and I agree with him that the "science" in museums are constructed to attract the masses.  The so-called experiments in these museums that allow the visitor to partake in, are insignificant and aimed to bring the consumer back for more.  Popular science is also in the movies,t.v. shows, magazines, and books.  One popular television show related to this is "MythBusters" on the Discovery Channel. I admit it is entertaining to watch, however I'm sure it isn't a true learning experience when it comes to real science.  They conduct many different experiments to reveal the truth behind many urban legends and myths.  It's difficult to believe the outcomes of their experiments when they aren't repeating as often a science experiment should.  The science of "MythBusters" is absolutely "dumbed down" to appeal to pop culture and increase television ratings.  The show may be giving me some sense of "awe", but then again I could just be confusing "awe" with amusement.  By giving in to all these popular science systems and not really understanding real science, I'm only poisoning my intelligence.

Science or Humanities Person? Assignment #1

"In 1959, the British scientist and novelist C.P. Snow argued that there was almost an unbridgeable divide between "the two cultures" of the humanities and the sciences"

Hello all. I'm Jennifer Morgana, an almost quarter of a century year old LaGuardia student.  I'm currently going to school full time, and pursuing an associate's degree in Liberal Arts-Social Sciences and Humanities.  Does that answer the question on whether I'm a science or humanities person? Not necessarily.  On the weekends I work as a certified Emergency Medical Technician, which is categorized under the science and medical field.  I've actually worked full time for 5 years as an EMT.  So as you can see, there is some interest in science there.  However, science and math are definitely not my strongest areas academically.  Thus, I am going the humanities route in earning my associate's degree here at LAGCC.

I've always had an interest in both the sciences and humanities.  Science has always been an interesting and challenging topic which has led me to one of my many life experiences as an EMT.  It is extremely important for me to apprehend basic life support because it is constructive and life saving.  Being acquainted with the inner workings of your anatomy,  recognizing signs and symptoms of an illness or injury, and competently intervening is very stimulating to me.  However, there is a difference between being fascinated by something and being proficient in the subject.  I would say that most people today think positively about science/technology because there are much more advances and breakthroughs in our present time than ever before.  More and more people today are also accepting science as a way of understanding their world regardless of what some religions allege.  The pieces to the world's puzzle are coming together more rapidly as science and technology progresses.

I will be graduating this coming summer, and yet I still do not know what my career and major will be.  I have applied to senior colleges majoring in social work,occupational therapy, education, and nutrition through the CUNY transfer services.  This is an indicator of being a little of both a science and humanities person.  But I must say, I've always been more confident in reading and writing as opposed to the math and sciences.  I also have quite an interest in music. I've participated in the school chorus from kindergarten to my senior year in high school.  In fact, my major in high school was music.  I appreciate all genres of music and am open to listening to music I'm not familiar with.  Social science in the humanities area is much more favorable to me because I am capable of identifying,nurturing, and advising people.  I feel this way because I'm a well-rounded individual with many different experiences in life.  The humanities consists of literature, the arts, and social sciences.  People think positively about these forms because they enrich one's life in satisfying ways.

Welcome

Hello all! Welcome to my Critical Thinking Blog for LIB200. I hope you will find it to be interesting and insightful.