I Am Doing By Ashley Montagu: Passage Analysis

The passage I am doing is from the author Ashley Montagu. This passage is about how emotions and prejudices influence the way scientists conduct their practice which leads into how the political belief of a scientist is coralated with his or her standing on nature and nurture. The author argues that scientists emotions and prejudices do in fact have a role to play in the way they do science. I will be stating my key concepts for this passage, i have three key concepts in total. My first concept is emotion, the meaning of emotion is clearly defined by the author becuase it is used in a way that points to feelings that influences an individuals actions and way of thinking. The term emotion is used too narrowly by the author in the sense that …show more content…
Those holding conservative political views tend to believe in the power of genes over environment, i think Toronto 2015 would agree with this premise because they know that conservatives are against change and are supporters of tradition which would most likely lead them to support Nature because of the similarities between conservative and nature. Professional belief would also support the premise because they would see the coralation and similarities between the belief of not changing tradition and the power of genes which implies that no matter what happens your genes will not …show more content…
One Distinguished scientist towards middle age became politically conservative and a firm believer in the supremecy of genes . Toronto 2015 would not accept this premise due to the fact that the author has mentioned one case to support his claim and no other cases, the public would surely question if he mentioned one case because he could not find another one. The last premise evaulation is as follows. One Distinguished scientist when young, was a socialist and environmentalist. Toronto 2015 would not accept this premise due to the fact that it is one case and gives no evidence but only the word of the author trying to prove a point. I will now be stating the fallacies i have uncovered within the passage. The first fallacy commitied is within this premise,One Distinguished scientist towards middle age became politically conservative and a firm believer in the supremecy of genes. The author commits the fallacy of composition becuase he is assuming what is true for one in this case the distinguished scientist and the coralation of his potitical and scientific belief, is true for all scientists. I will now uncover the second fallacy in the passage, One Distinguished scientist when young, was a socialist and environmentalist. The author makes the same mistake and commits the same fallacy as the first one, the author uses one example of a scientist who has a coralation between his scientific and political belief and assumes it must