Discussion 8---3/7/2010

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/human.php

This is an article written by Angela Ryan entitled Being Human: Science, Ethics and Our Rights. This article is about certain issues that only science and technology can wholly contribute to and the ethics vs rights behind these issues. This is a big issue right now because there are many things in science we are trying to do that many think are morally and/or ethically wrong and some think these are things we need to be pursuing. The problem we face is the bias between what some people think is wrong and what some people think is right. Another problem we face is the difference in "old" science and "modern" science. Many scientists that are from earlier years of science have issues with some of the things that scientists now days think are right to pursue. Scientists Colin Tudge speaks about this at a conference by stating, "Scientists are also uneducated in the philosophy of science nowadays and this is a major shortcoming for our modern scientific world." One of the major issues Ryan discussed was that of human cloning. This is a very controversial issue between scientists today as well as the public. The problem that we face is no matter what may be right or wrong, our citizens are who really speaks out about these issues. Personally, I do not believe that we should try and clone humans. The problem I have with this is, if GOD wanted people to have clones, then he would have made us able to do this through regular births. I do not see the reason in cloning a human being and I, as most of our citizens, see it as morally and ethically wrong. I also have the same feelings about other things such as abortion. I do not believe in abortion and this also fits in that vice of whether or not it is right or wrong. This was an interesting article because it hit on many issues that we as a society need to bring to a head and resolve these issues.

-Adam Traywick

Article 7---2/28/2010

http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2010/February/22021001.asp

The article I chose for this week is about funding science and budget cuts that science may be facing. The article was written by Anna Lewcock and entitled Funding Cuts Will "Damage A Generation" of Science. The article starts out by stating that cutting the budget cap on science is a bad idea. As stated in the article, "Cutting research budgets will harm science for an entire generation" is how the science world feels at this point. Not only will harm us from the progress we are making in certain areas that will not only better the US but the world in general. One of the areas they hit on was the fact that many aspiring scientists would loose interest in the field if there were budget cuts. This is because most of the projects that require a budget are very expensive, especially things such as cancer. This was better explained in the article by a nobel prize winner scientist Peter Agre by saying, "When we have booms in scientific funding, young people devote their careers to this, and then we have busts and they can't pay the rent." This is very true.

The article next talks about how science functions on an international basis and the funding that each country receives directly influences many other countries in the world. The US deals heavily with other powerhouses such as France, Germany and the UK. The UK is currently experiencing budget cuts and their economy is in about the same situation it was in before the cuts. The Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) furthers explores this by stating, "we should be investing in UK science to create sustainable employment and re balance our economy, instead of making damaging cuts which will have no discernible impact on the national debt."

I believe that we should continue to fund science, but only to a certain extent. Projects that really don't do much for society should not be funded nearly as heavily as projects that have a great influence on how our society functions.

Discussion 6---2/21/2010

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/articles/karle/index.html

This article was by Jerome Karle entitled The Role of Science and Technology in Future Design. The article was about how design in science has affected technology and society throughout the developing years of our country. He does this by focusing mostly on basic science and the support it gets from government funds. He explains how science is one of the most important tools for a normal functioning and growing society. He did research to find out if science was just as important to society as it was the government. To me, his results were surprising. He found that although the government and some private organizations heavily fund science in our society, the greatest amount of support was from public funds. Although this was a surprising find, it also makes me feel good that our society does focus on our scientific efforts enough to have that great of a support base. On the other hand, science has introduced some problems such as, but not limited to, religion issues. For obvious reasons I am not going into detail, but science has brought along many ideas that has steered this country away from what we were founded on. This is appropriate to discuss because it involves science, technology and society.

He then goes onto explain the different ways that our society has helped aid our scientific advances. As Karle explains, one of the most important ways we have done this is "through the technology that fundamental research generates." This is important because everything we have been able to accomplish and find is through the aid of science and the scientists that are involved. Karle also goes onto explain that the most evident reason society does this is because the return on expenditures is greater than the actual moneys spent.

He concludes the article by stating "there is no question that science and society will continue to co-evolve." The only things that will hold us back is funding. This was a very interesting article because is covered so many topics that really focused the role of how our society relates to science.

-Adam Traywick

Article 5 --- 2/13/2010

http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/cnews/article.php/3863106/Microsoft-to-Help-Scientists-With-Free-Azure-Use.htm

This article written by Stuart J. Johnston entitled Microsoft to Help Scientists With Free Azure Use is about a new type of Microsoft program that allows free access to members of certain science organizations such as, NASDAQ: MSFT and the NSF, among others to help aid in more efficient ways of organizing data. As stated in the article, "the variety of sheer volume of data collected by scientific researchers has grown exponentially in recent years;" this is one of the reasons that they are allowing scientists to accss this software for free. I think that this is a good idea considering most people probably dont know what Microsoft Azure is. Science has become one of the most prominent studies in America and allowing for free software to help with these studies is a good idea. The con of this idea, as stated by the article is like anything else, it "is an enormous and expensive task in itself." With our economy in the shape it is in right now, this could pose a possible problem. That just means more and more of our tax dollars would be going to something else that is not necessarily going to bring this country out of the predicament we are in. But, everything has its pros and cons, we just need to find out if we will benefit from this more than we would hurt. Another thing that may pose a problem with this idea is that all you have to do access this software is by "applying to the NSF with a supplemental request for an already-funded project." Allowing anyone that is conducting a project that is funded to apply for the software allows for many to take advantage of this opportunity. There needs to be tight stipulations to this project for it to work well, but I do think it could work for the better.

-Adam Traywick

Article 4---2/7/2010

http//:www.ifets.info/journals/12_3/13.pdf


This article entitled Reflections of Students in Their Use of Asynchronous Online Seminars is a study on the reflections of students taking online classes and how much they did or did not like them. It also examines to what extent a student actually learns compared to traditional classes with face-to-face interactions. The study showed that students actually learned just as much if not more than they would in a traditional classroom. The article states, "A key reason for the use of technology within a learning situation is to enhance the quality of learning and teaching." I agree with this. I have taken many online classes, including this one, and I really like them. I think it allows a student to still have the opportunity to learn and better themselves but without having to go sit in a classroom. I also think that it makes you a better student. This being the case because although you dont have to go to a classroom, you still have deadlines you have to meet. It makes the student stay on top of things and be a responsible student. Online classes have many pros and cons. But, overall I believe that taking an online class makes you a more rounded student because it makes you a more rounded student being that you have to stay on top of not only going to class, but also completing your online work.

-Adam Traywick

Article 3---1/31/2010

http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/darwins-world-of-pain-and-wonder

This is an article by Algis Valiunas entitled Darwin’s World of Pain and Wonder. Valiunas starts out by talking about a very controversial subject, religion. He begins the article by comparing science with reality and the very contrasting views that go along with this subject. He states that while Darwinism has a huge following, there are many other beliefs around the world. He brings science and society together by allowing for the fact that many of the religions studied are hinged on science and the fact that our societies are very diverse across the globe. Darwin was a very bright young man and due to his upbringing, he was taught to think outside the box and that he did. As everyone knows, he is who came up with the idea of evolution. This is a very contentious subject considering Christianity was the predominant religion in this time. It is said that everything can be proved or disproved through science. Personally, I don’t believe this. I understand that this class is not a religion class, but this topic does bring science, technology and society together. I am a Christian and believe in Christ. My neighbor may be a follower of Darwin and believe in evolution. He or she may also believe that this can proved through research and science. There are many studies on this where many believe that we can trace our entire lineage back to Africa through studying DNA. Technology has came a very long way since the times of Darwin and has helped in reshaping many of our oldest beliefs in society. I am very happy that we have been able to come as far as we have through science and technology, but I do not believe that it is the answer to everything. Although we have been able to solve some of nature’s oldest mysteries, some things can only be taught through others, i.e. our society. There are many ways that science, technology and society come together but this may be the most underlined approach. For this reason, I chose this article to talk about.

-Adam Traywick

Article 2---1/24/2010

http://www.helium.com/items/1496810-the-impact-of-technology-on-society

This is an article by Kathy Clark Smith entitled Technology's Impact on Society. She starts out by talking about how she saw a commercial for a country that had no clean water, hardly any medical treatment, poverty and disease infested and little technological advances. What she was fascinated by though was that they were seemingly just as happy as we are here in America with everything we could imagine right at our fingertips. She then goes on to explain how in many ways all the technology we have does make certain things easier but it allows us to communicate without any form of actual interaction between each other. All of these things we have are thought of as making us happier in many different ways, but it doesn’t always do that. Smith adds to this as she starts the article by stating, “We have the advantage of accessible technology that is supposed to make our lives easier, but I don't think it has made it better.” I agree with her statement. I do feel very blessed to be able to do the things I can do with the access to the technology we have, but that doesn’t always mean happiness. Since I am in college and away from home, I am sometimes forced to talk on the cell phone or internet to family members and some close friends. It makes me realize the importance of one on one interaction. I think that it is very important to have a more personal relationship with people that you are friends with. I do think that it is perfectly fine to have relationships over the internet or by the use of cell phones. We are very blessed as a country to have what we have. I think many of us, including myself, take great advantage of the things we have. Just the other day my 8 year old cousin came to my house and had a cell phone. That is a little ridiculous in my opinion but, that is what our society has become. Technology is great but I think we should use these things in moderation and be thankful for what we are able to have.

-Adam Traywick