Sei sulla pagina 1di 2

2.

6
The story of the elucidation of the structure of DNA illustrates that cooperation and collaboration
among scientists exists alongside competition between research groups. To what extent is
research in secret anti-scientific? What is the relationship between shared and personal
knowledge
in
the
natural
sciences?
I dont believe that research in secret is not scientific. In the world of scientists, there is a lot of
competition, therefore it is not good for scientists to share their findings with others, as they
might steal and take credit for work they hadnt done and spent hours, weeks, days, months, and
even years, working on. Shared knowledge is the general knowledge and findings that have been
exposed to the scientific community, such as Einsteins findings, Darwins theories, etc. But,
personal knowledge is what scientists discover on their own, without releasing information to the
scientific community. Basically, shared knowledge can be used by any scientist, it is used as
reference as well. But personal knowledge is not shared with the community, for fear of being
plagarized
and
stealing
credit
for
ideas
that
arent
theirs.
3.1
There is a link between sickle cell anemia and prevalence of malaria. How can we know
whether there is a causal link in such cases or simply a correlation?
We can use many tests and diagnostics to further test whether there might be a connection or
correlation between both diseases. Blood tests would be an important type of diagnostic. As soon
as we collect data, we can use graphs and other ways to interpret the information to further find
any type of relationship between these two conditions.
3.3
In 1922 the number of chromosomes counted in a human cell was 48. This remained the
established number for 30 years, even though a review of photographic evidence from the time
clearly showed that there were 46. For what reasons do existing beliefs carry a certain
inertia?
There are many reasons for which existing beliefs may carry a certain inertia over certain
aspects. Once scientists make claims, and there arent any immediate counter arguments, then the
claim is accepted by the scientific community and it remains without being disproved. Theres
also the prestige behind a scientists and his/her claims. In order to fully challenge and/or reject
Einsteins claims, for example, one must find very concrete evidence and data that would prove
Einstein, one of the greatest minds in History, wrong.
3.4
Mendels theories were not accepted by the scientific community for a long time. What factors
would encourage the acceptance of new ideas by the scientific community?
There are many factors that would encourage the acceptance of new ideas by the scientific
community. More evidence found over the years, and the acceptance and support from scientists
in the future, could contribute to the acceptance of new ideas. More data, more experiments,
more scientists, and much more different perspectives would encourage the acceptance of new

ideas.
3.5
The use of DNA for securing convictions in legal cases is well established, yet even universally
accepted theories are overturned in the light of new evidence in science. What criteria are
necessary for assessing the reliability of evidence?
The usage of DNA has been a key breakthrough in the criminal justice department. In the case of
security, the confirmation of the accused suspect by the DNA evidence is an important
characteristic. For example, many witnesses of a crime and further confirm the DNA results that
were found. And, after confirming the DNA results to the witness testimonies the reliability of
the usage of DNA would be further confirmed and used.

Potrebbero piacerti anche