Prompt 1: Using some (or all) of the distinguishing features of science identified by Okasha (http://shamiller.net/phi031/readings.d/okashaChapter1.pdf (Links to an external site.)), give reasons why either economics, political science, or computer science should be considered a genuine science like physics, chemistry, or biology; then give reasons why either economics, political science, or computer science should not be considered a genuine science. Give both sides of the argument, though you do not have to take a side. Note: You should only pick one of the options of economics, political science, or computer science — which are defined below — not all three.
Purpose of the prompt: To apply Okasha’s ideas about the nature of science to a specific (potential) science.
Economics: the branch of knowledge concerned with the production, consumption, and transfer of wealth.Political Science: the branch of knowledge that deals with systems of government; the analysis of political activity and behavior.Computer Science: the branch of knowledge concerned with the principles and use of computers.Prompt 2: John Ziman argues that to “understand the nature of science, we must look at the way in which scientists behave toward one another, how they are organized, and how information passes between them” (page 5). He continues, “science stands in the region where the intellectual, the psychological, and sociological coordinate axes intersect. It is knowledge, therefore intellectual, conceptual, and abstract. It is inevitably created by individual men and women, and therefore has a strong psychological aspect. It is public, and therefore molded and determined by the social relations between the individuals” (page 6).
Considering the movie Particle Fever, analyze how the psychological aspects of the search for the Higgs Boson differ between the experimentalists and theorists. What are the psychological aspects? Give specific examples from the movie, making sure to identify the theorists or experimentalists by name. How do the differences in the psychological aspects of the search affect the social relations among the scientists? Finally, how does looking at the search for the Higgs Boson in this way — in terms of Ziman’s ideas — enrich our understanding of science? That is, what does it help us see that we might otherwise overlook?
Purpose of the prompt: To analyze a concrete example of science in terms of Ziman’s ideas about the nature of science being a social activity.
Citations: Particle Fever can be found on YouTube and bilibili.com. When quoting or paraphrasing, please give an approximate time-stamp, e.g., At minute 32, Nima claims that the multiverse hypothesis… When quoting or paraphrasing the course readings, you must provide page numbers. However, it does not matter which citation style you use.
The individual sentences of your paper must be grammatical.Your train of thought should be clear; that is, the reader should be able to follow the flow of your ideas.You should support your ideas with reasons.What to avoid:
No fluff, filler, or wasted words, e.g., don’t start the paper with: “From the dawn of human philosophers have debated the nature of science…” Make your words count.Don’t make unsupported assertions, e.g., “Physics is the best science.”Watch our for repetitive writing as it is often a sign of disorganized thinking.Writing advice: Do more than one draft of the paper. Revise your work to improve clarity.
Proof #1: What is causing sea fermentation? Elaboration: Ocean causticity was never a lot of an issue until the Industrial Revolution in the 1800’s, the point at which it turned into an all the more problem that is begging to be addressed and undermined our green planet. Since the time the modern time the sea has retained “525 billion tons of CO2 from the climate, around 22 million every day”. It is the “hurtful outcome of abundance carbon dioxide in the climate that we don’t see or feel since’s everything happening submerged” (Bennett). This abundance CO2 is being brought about by ozone harming substances from consuming non-renewable energy sources, concrete assembling, decline in carbonate particles, compound responses causing high centralization of hydrogen particles and the rundown goes on. “An expected 30-40% of the carbon dioxide from human movement is discharged into the climate breaks up into seas, waterways and lakes” (Millero). At last, we are the fundamental driver of sea corrosiveness due to all the ozone depleting substances we produce. On account of individuals consuming such a significant number of powers, there is currently more carbon dioxide in the climate than whenever in the previous 15 million years. In the event that we keep discharging carbon dioxide noticeable all around in light of current circumstances the seawater pH could drop another 120 percent before this current century’s over. Proof #2: What is the science of sea fermentation? Elaboration: On an increasingly atomic level, the center of sea fermentation is because of basic science. At the point when carbon dioxide disintegrates into seawater, the pH level of the water gradually goes down and the water turns out to be increasingly acidic. “This procedure ties up carbonate particles and makes them less bottomless” (Bennett), these particles are fundamental for some ocean animals to flourish submerged. As we’ve taken in, all acids contain hydrogen particles (H+). At the point when water (H2O) and carbon dioxide (CO2) combine they make carbonic corrosive. This corrosive may not go about as fast, “yet it works a similar route as all acids: it discharges hydrogen particles (H+), which bond with different atoms in the zone”. In science, the more acidic something is, the lower pH it has. “A corrosive is a substance that discharges H+ particles; and pH is the scale used to quantify the centralization of H+ particles.” (Bennett). Guarantee: Ocean causticity is, generally, because of us human contaminating the earth with the consuming of non-renewable energy sources. A ton of CO2 is discharged along these lines and I accept the closer to assembling industrial facilities, huge urban areas and significant force plants the seas are the more acidic they are. Because of higher pH levels in the water close to significant CO2 providers, a portion of the sea has become troublesome or even perilous to live in for specific animals. The high causticity levels have made it debilitating and hard for shellfish or even coral to reconstruct and develop their shells, the high pH levels are gradually dissolving their shells. I feel that is the reason particular sorts of coral, scavangers and other marine life don’t live approach significant urban areas and force plants. Obviously there are different reasons however this is a contributing variable. At this moment we have sea acridity leveled out, however in the end it will end up being an all the more problem that is begging to be addressed and put the lives of some marine life at serious risk. We can’t let it find a workable pace and despite the fact that CO2 is basic in our condition, we have to decrease our creation of it. Obviously this isn’t a surprising bit of information to anybody however our activities are contrarily influencing sea-going life and we don’t take care of business. Yet, that is another story.>GET ANSWER Let’s block ads! (Why?)