Blog #23

LB 492 – Blog #23 – Melody Marzjarani

This passage outline is particularly unique as the material is presented to the reader in the form of an interview with a scientist. Within this discussion, it is significant to note that the interviewer targeted the application and importance of scientific virtues within the field, which is significant to highlight as this script sums up the entire purpose of our course. First and foremost, having this type of discussion is extremely valuable on both ends as it allows the outsider to peer into the very foundation that makes up the field; on the other end of the spectrum, this conversation allows individual scientists to reflect back on their community and critique/praise aspects of it to make room for future improvements.

Within this interview, I found it interesting that the scientist was asked to rate virtues on a scale. This exercise combines empirical and philosophical thought, as the scientist was asked to give a quantitative value to overarching values/dispositions practiced within his/her field. During this portion of the interview, I also agree with the scientist that being collaborative is not necessarily a crucial factor for scientific success. This mindset stems from class readings and discussions regarding Barbara McClintock, whose act of isolation was infamous within the scientific community. That being said, although she was very much an independent scientist, she reached her telos and flourished as she won the greatest symbol of recognition: a Nobel Prize. From this, one can conclude that she did in fact achieve eudemonia, but did so without using the help of those around her. Thus, one can draw a similar conclusion, as did the scientist interviewee: working alongside others is indeed significant, but it is not a requirement to achieve scientific success and become recognized by the community.

On another note, I was thrilled to see that this scientist referred back and provided many anecdotes supporting his reasoning for the application of skepticism within the scientific domain. Personally, it is fascinating to see how naturally ingrained this practice is, as the scientist even notes during the interview that he always remains guarded and skeptical when information is presented to him by his fellow colleagues and students. As a student within this field myself, I can attest to the fact that my personal lab job environment is similar to the one that this scientist describes. However, I strongly believe that with skepticism, openness must also be highlighted as well. It is one thing to be skeptical of others, but it is another thing to be skeptical but open to new ideas/concepts as this provides a solid foundation for moving forward and progressing.