Instructor: Dean Taciuch
Course: ENGH 302
Date: 2/12/16
Show Me the Science
Question 1
Daniel Dennett, a Tuft University philosophy professor, wrote the essay Show Me the Science. Dennett’s primary audience is the school students, particularly those in undergraduate and high school. The author teaches intelligent designs, which he considers as the fairest way to go about education and training for the future. He challenges creative designers to get in line with the enticing hypotheses that are actively defended but still insufficiently supported by hard facts.
Question 2
Dennett presents numerous warrants. For instance, he outlines that the Discovery Institute, a conservative organization that has substantially supported intelligent design, complains that its members face hostility from the established scientific journals. This could be a limiting factor, but he does not consider it as a real hurdle to intelligent design. He challenges the young scientists to work tirelessly in the labs with an aim to overturn any significant proposition of existing evolutionary biology. He goes further to suggest that instead of Discovery Institute spending much on publishing books and articles for non-scientists and other public relations efforts, it should finance its own peer-reviewed electronic journals. That way, the institution will be supporting the young scientists. Question 3 The author claims that teaching both intelligent design and evolution does not force any particular theory on anyone. With today’s diverse society, he considers the approach as the fairest way to conduct education and training of people for the future. Dennett states that the designs found in nature are so brilliant, but the process of design that generates them utterly lacks the intelligence of its own. Question 4 One of the key controversies that Dennett recognizes is the fact that no intelligent design hypothesis has even been ventured as a rival explanation of any biological phenomenon. For instance, he points out at Darwin's insight that states that eyes can automatically get better and better and better, without any intelligent designer. Dennett also says that evolutionary biology has proved to be mistaken in concluding that the presence of a finished product, such as …show more content…
For instance, she blames the challenges that result in misunderstandings and confusions of the public on matters of scientific developments to the difficulty that the scientific communities experience when finding appropriate terminology. In addition, the professor argues that the complex nature of modern science as another course of people’s misunderstanding of the advances being made in scientific fields.
Question 3
In essence, Randall’s audience appears to share her warrants, owing to the fact that there is a significant level of misunderstanding of scientific developments. Therefore, the concerns raised by the author of the article are authentic, and they deserve to be addressed.
Question 4
The author claims that it is crucial for the scientific communities to assist members of the public in understanding their developments and inventions. The understanding can be fostered by the provision of proper explanations of the scientific issues. She also asserts that individuals should know that scientific work can be complex in nature, and avoiding the simplistic narrations may act as an important step in decreasing the occurrences of distorted information. Randall also states that patience is a virtue that the public needs to exercise since it is only through having an understanding of the bigger picture, as opposed to the works in progress, that the inventions will make much sense to