LB492

We read about “the capacity to be alone”, a trait that I see in my self and never really thought of it being important or a skill . This trait is also pretty common in the scientific  related   career   fields . Often times this capability is seen as being shy, social awkward, or introverted. These are not the same qualities but are often times grouped together by nonscientist when judging scientist. When scientist are alone we aren’t just hiding from people, we are in our own heads. We are thinking about everything, observing and questions the things we see, and being carious about the world. As a female scientist I can’t imagine growing up a society that thought I was unusual for females to have intellectual desires and enjoying learning things. I get annoyed with the inequality of women in science in the year 2017 but a hundred years ago it was a hundred times worse. The fact there was only two university’s where women could get an education blows my mind. I’m grateful that I was

I picked to read Gertrude Elion’s obituary because her career is basically my life goal. She was a biochemist and a pharmacologist. I thought there would be  similarities  to Darwin's obituaries however that wasn't  the  case   Elion’s obituary wasn’t anything like Darwin’s. I’m curious to know if it’s different because of the time, the fact she’s a female, the field she worked in, or some other reason. Darwin’s were more personal and talked of his character, whereas Elion’s was just listing off achievements. There was only one single sentence that talked about anything other than scientific achievements and its says “Ms. Elion was noted for her precise work, intellectual brilliance and ability to work with others.” I’m sure that more than this could have been said or at least elaborated on. I also felt like she was undermined when they brought up how she was always one step behind Dr. Hitching. She had worked with Hitching for decades but he died a year before she did. I hope

I find reading Aristotle and other philosophy writings very difficult and I don't know if I understood any of this. The writing is not straight forward or clear so hopefully I didn't miss-understand any of this. I think Aristotle's is trying to get across the point that everything we do in life is to aim for happiness or to be good. I think pretty much everyone would say their goal in life is to be happy but everyone has a different definition of happiness. Aristotle believes that one’s happiness can’t be measured or reflected on until ones death. I think this is because life has ups and downs and is constantly changing until its over. People can be happy or sad and different time periods of their life but once they are dead society can then look at their life as a whole and say if that person was happy or not. Maybe I think of happiness as something different because I don’t understand this concept. Yes, I think that it’s easier to be able to look at someone’s life as a w

In the second half of Darwin’s autobiography the first thing I found notable was he was willing to try alternative therapies for his illness . Even though he was skeptical he was willing to try  hydropathy therapy . This showed how he was open minded and I believe this to be a trait many scientist have. He was open to finding new medical treatment the same way he was open to finding new truths of the natural world. All though he was open minded to new ideas he still questioned them . Questioning ideas rather then believing they are true with out evidence is another trait I believe make a scientist. Darwin was able to test out this new treatment to form his own option without blindly believing a physician.  A similarity to Franklin I found was they both questioned their faith. Like Franklin it was a slow change in beliefs. Neither one simply woke up one day with a realization that what they had believed in was wrong. Both started by asking questions and being curious. I find this dif

           Many characteristics we have come from our parents. Sometimes it’s something passed on thought genes and other times is something learned from our environment. We can see an example of this in Darwins life. Many of his family members were involved in the science field. Darwin didn’t want to be a physician like his father and other family members but physicians and other scientist have similar mind sets. Darwin was also able to help his brother with chemistry experiments, sparking his interest in science. On top of this science atmosphere his father also was all way pushing him to do well in school. Darwin is a smart man but easily became uninterested at school so didn’t do as well and he should have. Without his home life like this he could have been a completely different person. One of the most interesting things to me, since there was similarity in Ben Franklin, is that Darwins family had attended meetings like Junto. Erasmus and Josiah participated in t

I had never thought to compare internal and external goods to each other. Internal goods are more important yet in life it appears that people often prioritize external goods. A lot of students that I’ve meet during my time as an undergrad in Lyman Brings have expressed that they are in this science program because many science related career fields have high salaries. These people are motivated by externals goods. People like them would take more pride in getting a Nobel Prize rather than the scientific discovery they made to get them that prize. It’s not wrong to appreciate the external goods but the internal goods should matter more to you if you want to be a good scientist. Curiosity and truth should be enough reason to be a scientist, if it’s not you shouldn’t be one. This leads into a question asked in Chapter two asking if seeking honors is dishonorable. There is no black and white answer, but if your pure reason is to get honors then yes. Everyone need some