After winning the Nobel Prize, I realized that the science industry has changed in a myriad of

Posted on | by EssayClue Team

Question Two

Student’s Name

Institution Affiliation

After winning the Nobel Prize, I realized that the science industry has changed in a myriad of ways. Science has changed in how, where, and why it is done. Since the 1850s, science has been changing gradually in terms of place, tools, space, and institution. The nature and shape of science has changed such that the relationship that exists between the latest and historical scientific ideas has changed. Analyzing the growth from the 1850s shows that science is moving away from contingent past that was mostly non-determinant. The society, community, gender, and technology have played a significant role in mitigating scientific change. The change that has occurred in science is related to aspects of rationality, relativism, and realism. In 1804, French scientists Jean Baptiste Biot and Joseph Louis Gay Lassac ascended to a height of more than 23,000 in a bid to study the magnetic field and the earth’s atmosphere.

During this time, the source of enlightenment ideals was mainly universal, transparent, empirical, and cumulative. Another experiment was carried out in 1768 on a Bird in an Air Pump. Other scientists such as Jonathan Harker were more interested in learning how the experiment was done in order to defeat the inventor. This aspect created a sense of competition amongst the scientist, which grew to the status that is evidenced today. Experiments were carried out in laboratories and museums, among other institutions. The Cavendish laboratory which was founded in 1874 is also one of the famous institutions where research was carried out; the electron was discovered in this institution by Thompson in 1897. Most of the artefacts were collected in museums such as the “cabinet of curiosities “of Ferrante Imperato in 1600. The scientific garden is another evidence of the significance of scientific evidence such as the garden at Padua, Italy in 1591 and Kew Gardens in London during the late 19th century. Other sites that were significant in making knowledge that made a difference in the past such as the Geologists’ field camp in Colorado, 1870. Other sites that made a significant difference in science include the medical theatre, the research ship, and the astronomical observatory.

However, although there are different types of places, tools, spaces, and institutions that have contributed positively to the scientific field, significance of Nobel prize has lost its meaning. Modern collaborative research mechanism has lost their importance and essence in the scientific field. Although a group of scientists win Nobel prizes – chemistry, physics, and physiology – and get feted as unfailing sages in sciences, stressing on the significance of individual achievement has encouraged competition rather than fostering cooperation. The provision of Noble prizes has caused the scientists’ vision to stray from the purpose that was shared back in the 1850s, and instead, it has become personal and largely reorganized. It is important to change the system in order to avoid rewarding a version that has become outdated. Scientists should be encouraged to cooperate rather than compete against each other. This will not only improve the relevance of science but will also increase the public trust and belief in research and science.

After winning the Nobel Prize, I realized that the science industry has changed in a myriad of

Posted on | by EssayClue Team

Question Two

Student’s Name

Institution Affiliation

After winning the Nobel Prize, I realized that the science industry has changed in a myriad of ways. Science has changed in how, where, and why it is done. Since the 1850s, science has been changing gradually in terms of place, tools, space, and institution. The nature and shape of science has changed such that the relationship that exists between the latest and historical scientific ideas has changed. Analyzing the growth from the 1850s shows that science is moving away from contingent past that was mostly non-determinant. The society, community, gender, and technology have played a significant role in mitigating scientific change. The change that has occurred in science is related to aspects of rationality, relativism, and realism. In 1804, French scientists Jean Baptiste Biot and Joseph Louis Gay Lassac ascended to a height of more than 23,000 in a bid to study the magnetic field and the earth’s atmosphere.

During this time, the source of enlightenment ideals was mainly universal, transparent, empirical, and cumulative. Another experiment was carried out in 1768 on a Bird in an Air Pump. Other scientists such as Jonathan Harker were more interested in learning how the experiment was done in order to defeat the inventor. This aspect created a sense of competition amongst the scientist, which grew to the status that is evidenced today. Experiments were carried out in laboratories and museums, among other institutions. The Cavendish laboratory which was founded in 1874 is also one of the famous institutions where research was carried out; the electron was discovered in this institution by Thompson in 1897. Most of the artefacts were collected in museums such as the “cabinet of curiosities “of Ferrante Imperato in 1600. The scientific garden is another evidence of the significance of scientific evidence such as the garden at Padua, Italy in 1591 and Kew Gardens in London during the late 19th century. Other sites that were significant in making knowledge that made a difference in the past such as the Geologists’ field camp in Colorado, 1870. Other sites that made a significant difference in science include the medical theatre, the research ship, and the astronomical observatory.

However, although there are different types of places, tools, spaces, and institutions that have contributed positively to the scientific field, significance of Nobel prize has lost its meaning. Modern collaborative research mechanism has lost their importance and essence in the scientific field. Although a group of scientists win Nobel prizes – chemistry, physics, and physiology – and get feted as unfailing sages in sciences, stressing on the significance of individual achievement has encouraged competition rather than fostering cooperation. The provision of Noble prizes has caused the scientists’ vision to stray from the purpose that was shared back in the 1850s, and instead, it has become personal and largely reorganized. It is important to change the system in order to avoid rewarding a version that has become outdated. Scientists should be encouraged to cooperate rather than compete against each other. This will not only improve the relevance of science but will also increase the public trust and belief in research and science.

Leave a Reply