The argument “A Culture of Denial” (2015), written by Christopher Delgado, warns that the current practice of denying scientific discoveries will cause the human species to slow in the advancements of science. Delgado begins with a brief history of science in the view of lay persons and then tells how religion, personal agenda and ignorance helps halt breakthroughs in science. By writing this Delgado hoped to point out lead reasons of denials in scientific breakthroughs. The intended audience is to lay persons whom do not have a strong background in sciences.
I like how Delgado transitioned into the main points by briefly discussing the history of doubt and ill judgement of science as a whole. I learned how scientist had to defend their research …show more content…
He believed that people who did not agree with major breakthroughs could be categorized into three groups: religion, ignorance, and personal agendas. When using the Evolutionary theory as an example to show how people can disagree for religious reasons, he could have chosen a better model like stem cells because they are scientifically proven and just as or more controversial simply due to religion. The Evolutionary Theory is still just a theory until they find the full skeleton of Lucy. As long as that fact stands, people can rightly view the topic as they see fit. Personal Agendas cannot be seen as denial in his chosen example about “Corporations [that] needed… to create doubt in the community” (261). His example tells the audience that the fossil fuel corporations mislead citizens into thinking that fossil fuels were not damaging. This example in itself tells the reader that the corporations understood the effects of fossil fuels, but were against them simply for the economic gain, instead of denial. Delgado does use vaccination superbly for the example of ignorance, simply, because the ignorant citizen on medicine may not be able to analyze medical research correctly. Thus causing misbelief, doubt and denial in the breakthrough. Overall Delgado was
I like how Delgado transitioned into the main points by briefly discussing the history of doubt and ill judgement of science as a whole. I learned how scientist had to defend their research …show more content…
He believed that people who did not agree with major breakthroughs could be categorized into three groups: religion, ignorance, and personal agendas. When using the Evolutionary theory as an example to show how people can disagree for religious reasons, he could have chosen a better model like stem cells because they are scientifically proven and just as or more controversial simply due to religion. The Evolutionary Theory is still just a theory until they find the full skeleton of Lucy. As long as that fact stands, people can rightly view the topic as they see fit. Personal Agendas cannot be seen as denial in his chosen example about “Corporations [that] needed… to create doubt in the community” (261). His example tells the audience that the fossil fuel corporations mislead citizens into thinking that fossil fuels were not damaging. This example in itself tells the reader that the corporations understood the effects of fossil fuels, but were against them simply for the economic gain, instead of denial. Delgado does use vaccination superbly for the example of ignorance, simply, because the ignorant citizen on medicine may not be able to analyze medical research correctly. Thus causing misbelief, doubt and denial in the breakthrough. Overall Delgado was