Blog #18

This portion of  “Ideas and Opinions,” was especially thought provoking as it highlights the significance of a stable political backdrop towards the progression of the sciences. This chapter encompassed scientific involvement and its relationship with politics, culture, and the economy. Part II of this book encompasses each of these topics via different lenses, which is significant and unique as it provides an all-encompassing perspective. The reader is exposed to Albert Einstein’s views via excerpts from letters addressed to the First Lady, public lectures, and recordings from a private interview. Throughout this passage, it is evident that Einstein is an advocate for peace, as he offers methods of disarmament and establishing a world government aimed to unite the world powers. It is significant to note that first and foremost, Einstein was notably a physicist at heart, but as illustrated throughout this book, he was one who was involved in a multitude of other domains, notably politics. This raises the question, should scientists be involved in such fields? Why or why not? Within this text, there was a letter released by the Russian Academy that was even titled, “Dr. Einstein’s Mistaken Notions” (Einstein 146). Within this letter, the members of this academy acknowledge Einstein’s involvement with underlying political issues, but also openly discourage such perspectives as they later note that “we believe that Dr. Einstein has entered a false and dangerous path; he is chasing the mirage of a ‘world state’ ” (Einstein 153). In this portion of the reading, one can see a distinction made between experts and amateurs. On a personal note, I strongly believe that it is significant to maintain these connections between varying fields, as many topics require a multitude of perspectives in order to ensure maximum efficiency and safety for others. This comment is made specifically towards the creation and harnessing the use of atomic energy (H-bomb). As noted by Einstein himself, although the world powers and their governments control and utilize nuclear weapons, he notes that it is vital to include scientists and the knowledge they contribute, within this mix. 

On another note, Einstein highlights the importance of political stability not only in the development of nations, but also scientific progress. Throughout this section, he notes that war has only lead to more destruction, and likens killings during warfare to that of murder. He later states that political instability has negatively impacted the formation of the scientific community; this is evident towards foreign policies that have prevented the flux of scientists to different nations. In other words, the diversity of science is directly dependent on political and cultural factors, in turn, hindering the path of individual scientists towards leading the good life. As we see throughout this reading, Einstein was widely known as one who immersed himself in different opportunities and fields, and one can only wonder, what virtues did Einstein apply throughout his life? 

Lastly, this reading is especially significant as it shows that Einstein is in fact a representative of the scientific field. Through his multifaceted roles, Einstein rose to the ranks as a celebrity, which is a stark contrast to the isolated Barbara McClintock. This begs the question, does such a prominent role hurt or help science and why? 

---

Blog #17

            This section of “Ideas and Opinions,” was especially significant as the reader is exposed to a different side of Albert Einstein: one that is less empirical and more philosophical. Each segment of Part I in this book explores a different perspective that stretch beyond scientific thought and the first segment is fascinating as Einstein mentions the “death” of the language of Latin uniting everyone. This is a fascinating thought as the idea of a common language is applicable to the scientific realm, especially as communication is considered a fundamental practice in the progression of scientific thought and practice. Furthermore, Einstein then delved into other topics, and one that was particularly significant was a section where he notes of the differences between American and European cultures. In particular, he states that American science and technology is far more developed than that of the Europeans, and he attributes the slow-moving progression of European countries to the values they placed upon isolation and independence. As Einstein later notes, if an individual is isolated from birth, they will remain, “primitive and beastlike in his thoughts and feelings to a degree that we can hardly conceive” (Einstein 14). Again, this supports the Aristotelian idea of friendships–in the science community and beyond–as a fundamental tool used in the journey towards achieving eudemonia, or leading a flourishing life.

            However, it is important to note that Einstein does in fact strongly support the idea of independence within the scientific community, which is a significant point to illustrate as he is the first individual encountered thus far that has advocated for a balance between the community and the individual. As previously mentioned, Einstein was a strong advocate for establishing a bond with others and in doing so, creating a wholesome community of individuals communicating ideas effectively amongst one another. However, he also notes of the importance of maintaining one’s individuality within such a community; in other words, he states a strong community is a necessity, but too much unification may lead to something lackluster as all individual creativity diminishes. This concept again draws many parallels to that of “Nicomachean Ethics,” where Aristotle notes of the importance of friendships, but as mentioned during class discussion, I agree that friendships are not necessary but serve more as an accessory towards achieving eudemonia. This is clearly depicted in Barbara McClintock’s biography, where we see that although she did achieve her form of eudemonia, by connecting and feeling the oneness with nature and her research, it is significant to note that if she had formed friendships with others around her, she would have achieved such flourishing sooner. Lastly, as Einstein mentioned, a balance is necessary between maintaining one’s individuality, as it contributes creative thought processes and perspectives into the scientific pool of thought, and having the ability to formulate connections and learn to communicate with others so as to boost such progress.

Blog #16

“Ideas and Opinions,” is a fascinating read as it introduces an entirely different and more humanized side to what is considered one of the most brilliant minds of the 20^th century, Albert Einstein. This particular section of this book is unique in that it introduces the reader to Einstein’s life as a scientist and a philosophical thinker by compiling different aspects of his life: from his various publications to lectures presented at universities and prestigious members of the scientific community. The format of this book is particularly significant to note because although this book is separated into different parts, it is particularly interesting to see different subtitles within each chapter/segment. Although this book humanizes Albert Einstein by offering glimpses into his personal perspectives/experiences, the official format that is presented in this book still hints at the meticulous scientist underneath a veil of formality.
From Einstein’s lectures throughout this passage, one can easily draw many parallels to other scientists previously highlighted in class discussions. In the first few paragraphs of Part V, Einstein thanks the Prussian Academy of Sciences for accepting him within their community as he states that this esteemed sphere of scientific research and progression will free him of worldly distractions and allow him to “dedicate” his life to science. This mentality is equally reflected in Darwin and McClintock, in the latter case, McClintock’s biography is even titled, “A Feeling for the Organism,” which reinforces the theme of oneness with the laws of nature, which is constantly reflected in the sciences. Furthermore, this section lists descriptions of publications by Einstein, and based on the way this is portrayed, it appears as though Einstein worked independently in much of his research, which is similar to the actions of McClintock.

Although there were a variety of similarities between Einstein and other scientists previously discussed, there were subtle yet significant differences between these as well. What was especially fascinating about this section was that Einstein openly acknowledged the potential for failures, which intersects with Dr. Pennock’s point that courageousness is a fundamental quality of scientists. Within “Ideas and Opinions,” Einstein pleads with the Prussian Academy of Sciences to maintain their support even if his research ends in failures. This line resonated something with me as it illustrates an immense contrast to McClintock’s scientific approach; while Einstein openly acknowledges the obstacles he might face; McClintock acknowledges her mistakes in a negative light. Although it was previously discussed in lecture that her lack of friendships hindered McClintock’s progress, I also believe that after reading this passage, that it was also her mentality of striving towards perfection that proved to be one of her biggest obstacles.

Blog #15

This particular chapter of Dr. Pennock’s book highlights the importance of uncertainty in a field reputable for its certainty. Specifically, this chapter illustrates that to have a vocation, or in other words, a calling for the field of science, one must be willing to face a multitude of failures; in doing so, one of the fundamental scientific virtues is that of courage and perseverance. As a science major, this chapter resonated something with me, as my character and experiences have shaped me to adopt such values as well. While reading this chapter, I found that much of the material presented is done so through rose-colored glasses. For instance within one passage, Dr. Pennock mentions that anecdotes of failure are eagerly accepted by scientists looking for sources of inspiration within such a competitive field. Although I agree on one count that failures should be highlighted as sources of motivation, this concept again raises the issue of “should it” versus “does it”; in other words, even though scientists ideally should admire stories of failures and obstacles, this is not a realistic depiction of what's practiced in the scientific community. Many scientists are often illustrated solely based on their successes, while their failures are often shrouded in a veil of secrecy. However, within this course, we have delved into deep discussions regarding the autobiographies of prominent scientists, and only then were we able to observe scientific failures.

Another aspect that is significant in the journey towards achieving scientific virtues is the idea of ignorance, which I strongly believe is vital because science is built upon the foundation of not knowing/asking questions, this again highlights the virtue of curiosity as a factor that contributes towards the process of inviting constant questions and studies. Within this concept, I found it extremely interesting that this chapter notes of the insignificance of authority figures within the grand scheme of things. In other words, Dr. Pennock states that even authority figures are also in a state of constant learning and curiosity, which goes against the common stereotype that scientists are all-knowing and should maintain this level of flourishing. In accordance to this thought, Pennock notes that true knowledge is gained from being one with the facts of nature; this mirrors Barbara McClintock’s journey towards devoting her existence towards her passion and discovering the truths of nature for herself. Although friendship is indeed a significant aspect of scientific success, I also believe that one must develop a personal relationship with science in order to achieve eudemonia without the influence of outside perspectives limiting that view.

Blog #14

The excerpt, “Scientific Discipline,” from Dr. Pennock’s book further illustrates the connections between science and philosophical thought. In this section, Dr. Pennock notes of the ways that science is a field where one must have a vocation, or a “calling” for it.  I fully agree to this statement, but I do not believe that this quality is unique to the sciences, but in fact is a characteristic of all fields. Furthermore, the chapter draws on the words of Max Weber, who stated that science requires an immense passion for science; this mindset will further narrow down one’s focus within the field and contribute towards the immense specialization of the scientific domain as a whole. He further delves into this concept by stating that only by putting on blinders towards other specialties and focusing on one vocation will one achieve a state of total consciousness. I do not agree with this statement as science is a field that requires a foundation of fluidity in order to function properly. As highlighted within the pages of Dr. Barbara McClintock’s biography, her isolation from the idea of a community and her immense focus on her specialty, ultimately hindered her progression: as an individual and as a scientist. Although she did in fact grew to flourish within her vocation, she encountered immense difficulties communicating to other geneticists and related fields, which not only hurt her, but was an obstacle for the community as a whole, trying to understand McClintock’s language of science.

Furthermore, within this chapter, Dr. Pennock further dives into the concept of scientific virtues, specifically that of curiosity. He draws examples from Charles Darwin, and from this particular passage what really stood out to me, as the reader was that Darwin attributed his success to that of his experiences and the habits he formulated as a result. This is a significant point to illustrate as Darwin himself highlights that his virtues were gained over his lifetime, and were not things that were necessarily inherent. Later on in passage, Dr. Pennock does in fact note that some virtues can be traced back to certain instincts; in accordance to this idea, are such instincts more primitive (in reference to Aristotle’s idea that man is a rational animal?) and what are examples of such instinctive traits?

Blog #13

Thoreau’s Walden introduces a deep philosophical concept that’s conveyed by way of using an elaborate metaphor. In the chapter, “The Pond in Winter,” Thoreau starts off by depicting his journey to Walden Pond in search of water. In this particular section, he highlights the rumors of the seemingly bottomless pond. This note was especially significant as he further elaborates on this topic by mentioning that although there are many stories circulating about the endless boundaries of the pond, many will believe the rumors without taking on the means to explore this hidden truth for themselves. This line resonated something with me especially as this line really illustrates the interconnectedness that exists between philosophical thought and other fields, notably the sciences. Within this domain, it is the duty of the scientific community to inform others, both within their own community and outside to the general layman. However, in doing so, much of the information that is presented is rarely questioned as the information scientists present is generally accepted without much question. This again highlights the issue of the expert versus authority, and the gray area that exists between these two concepts. Specifically, as discussed in previous discussions, an expert is generally someone that is knowledgeable about a particular subject/topic, whereas someone that has authority has the capacity to influence those around them (and this can be based on that person’s expertise or not). In relation to this passage, Thoreau introduces a significant idea via this metaphorical passage: at what point should we trust the information presented to us? Throughout the passage, Thoreau appears more of an individual that sets to discover information for himself; this skepticism is something that is a fundamental idea in the field of science. So the question this brings up is: should scientists always remain skeptical of information presented to them (in accordance, will this mindset hinder scientific progress)? And if not, on what grounds should they trust new information, when it’s presented by an expert or authority figure?