parochial: A narrow view on things
squander: Waste
beset: Trouble or threaten persistently
stiflying: Restraining
rabid: Fanatical
wanton: Deliberate and unprovoked
craven: Completely lacking in courage
ebullience: Exuberance
insinuate: Suggest or hint in an indirect or unpleasant way
felicity: Intense happiness
cutthroat: Fierce and intense, often ruthless
misanthrope: A human who dislikes mankind and avoid society
audacious: 1) Imprudent 2) Showing a willingness to take risks
indubitably: Undoubtedly
pontificate: Expressing one's opinions in a very pompous manner
purport: To claim to be or do something, often falsely
Ok I got lazy. Good luck for GP tomorrow!
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Comments on statement "Instead of the pursuit of the truth, science has become the pursuit of profit."
Science was once a branch of philosophy, but has evolved into a field of its own, defined by the pursuit of truth through the scientific method, which fundamentally derives from the method of scientific induction, which predicts phenomenons through past observations. What science pursues is not the absolute truth, but rather a workable truth, in fact the simplest truth, that is consistent with our observations, a philosophy known as Occam’s razor. The other defining characteristic of science is the setting up of experiments to observe specific phenomenons while complying to the principles such as reproducibility, which ensure that science is the same throughout the universe and any truths found are universal. Ever since leaving the branch of philosophy, science has been “contaminated” with various less philosophical aspects to it, such as applied science, which revolves around making science more applicable. This has also attracted firms to take up research in order to utilise science in their pursuit of profits, be it through the increase of competitiveness through product innovation, or to increase the efficiency of their workers and hence maximise their profits. Examples of firms utilising science for a profit motive include GlaxoSmithKline, Monsanto, and more ubiquitously, Airbus.
Instead of exclusively pursuing truth, science has now been utilised by companies in their pursuit of profits. This largely stems from science’s effectiveness in producing visible results in the real world. This effectiveness can be said to stem from a unique characteristic of science, as new generations of scientists build upon the observations and theories of the past, leading to the constant and rapid improvement of science. Furthermore, science is now in a golden age; ever since the advent of computers and especially the Internet, the storage and transmission of information from scientific research and experiments has never been so easily archived and shared, and building upon another’s work has never been so convenient. As such, firms today tend to find it irresistible to engage in scientific research. This is evident in how companies such as GlaxoSmithKline pour billions of dollars into developing cures to specific diseases in order to reap the profits that come with a monopoly on the production of a medicine.
Furthermore, for scientists, research is now a globally accepted field which has been known to come with huge financial remuneration, as firms gradually recognise how scientific research can put their balance sheets in better light. In today’s materialistic world, there has undoubtedly been more than just a handful of scientists who forsake the pursuit of pure science for applied sciences for the sake of financial remuneration. In an extreme case, in order to secure his job as a researcher Huang Woo-suk had faked numerous papers about his stem cell research in order to impress his employers. This can, to a certain extent, explain why scientific research is trending towards the goal of profit seeking.
However, there remains strong support for the “pure” sciences, especially in fields such as physics, where physicists all over the world are currently devoting great efforts to find out about the fundamental nature of the universe, and the search for elementary particles, while not having much obvious practical use, has called for extreme measures such as the development of a cross-border project: the famous Large Hadron Collider. Such research is clearly for the sake of the pursuit of truth, and it would be a sweeping statement to conclude that science has degenerated into the search for profits.
Besides, the pursuit of profits in science may not be totally without its merits. The science of today contrasts from science of the past in one superficial but nevertheless striking way: that it is much more elaborate and hence expensive. For example, while a basic physics lab fifty years ago might have been equipped with rulers, stopwatches and mirrors, the basic physics lab of today involves more sophisticated instruments such as the travelling microscope, the data-logger and polaroids. At the advanced level, this distinction is particularly glaring as modern physicists today have spent billions of dollars creating extreme conditions such as freezing temperatures close to the Absolute Zero, where no heat exists, the acceleration of electrons to near-light speeds through large potential gradients, as well as the creation of extremely powerful lasers which require large quantities of tailor-made lenses and surfaces. Without the commercialisation of science, the traditional sources of funding such as donations will definitely be insufficient to fund the extravagance needed for the optimal progress of science today. Hence, the commercialisation of science does indeed bring about its own benefits.
Instead of exclusively pursuing truth, science has now been utilised by companies in their pursuit of profits. This largely stems from science’s effectiveness in producing visible results in the real world. This effectiveness can be said to stem from a unique characteristic of science, as new generations of scientists build upon the observations and theories of the past, leading to the constant and rapid improvement of science. Furthermore, science is now in a golden age; ever since the advent of computers and especially the Internet, the storage and transmission of information from scientific research and experiments has never been so easily archived and shared, and building upon another’s work has never been so convenient. As such, firms today tend to find it irresistible to engage in scientific research. This is evident in how companies such as GlaxoSmithKline pour billions of dollars into developing cures to specific diseases in order to reap the profits that come with a monopoly on the production of a medicine.
Furthermore, for scientists, research is now a globally accepted field which has been known to come with huge financial remuneration, as firms gradually recognise how scientific research can put their balance sheets in better light. In today’s materialistic world, there has undoubtedly been more than just a handful of scientists who forsake the pursuit of pure science for applied sciences for the sake of financial remuneration. In an extreme case, in order to secure his job as a researcher Huang Woo-suk had faked numerous papers about his stem cell research in order to impress his employers. This can, to a certain extent, explain why scientific research is trending towards the goal of profit seeking.
However, there remains strong support for the “pure” sciences, especially in fields such as physics, where physicists all over the world are currently devoting great efforts to find out about the fundamental nature of the universe, and the search for elementary particles, while not having much obvious practical use, has called for extreme measures such as the development of a cross-border project: the famous Large Hadron Collider. Such research is clearly for the sake of the pursuit of truth, and it would be a sweeping statement to conclude that science has degenerated into the search for profits.
Besides, the pursuit of profits in science may not be totally without its merits. The science of today contrasts from science of the past in one superficial but nevertheless striking way: that it is much more elaborate and hence expensive. For example, while a basic physics lab fifty years ago might have been equipped with rulers, stopwatches and mirrors, the basic physics lab of today involves more sophisticated instruments such as the travelling microscope, the data-logger and polaroids. At the advanced level, this distinction is particularly glaring as modern physicists today have spent billions of dollars creating extreme conditions such as freezing temperatures close to the Absolute Zero, where no heat exists, the acceleration of electrons to near-light speeds through large potential gradients, as well as the creation of extremely powerful lasers which require large quantities of tailor-made lenses and surfaces. Without the commercialisation of science, the traditional sources of funding such as donations will definitely be insufficient to fund the extravagance needed for the optimal progress of science today. Hence, the commercialisation of science does indeed bring about its own benefits.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)