Scientific Inquiry: Invention and Test

Carl G. Hampel, Germany (1905 – 1997)

Summary: The essay is written by Carl G. Hempel Semmelweis, a Hungarian physician and German writer. It recounts his investigation into a problem at the Vienna General Hospital, where more women were dying from childbed fever in the First Maternity Division than in the Second Maternity Division. Various hypotheses were tested, including the influence of epidemics, overcrowding, and rough examinations by medical students. Semmelweis eventually discovered that the transmission of disease was linked to dirty hands, leading to the implementation of proper handwashing with chemicals, resulting in a decrease in the death rate. The interpretation emphasizes the scientific nature of the inquiry, highlighting the importance of hypotheses, testing predictions, and interdisciplinary approaches in scientific discovery. It also suggests that chance can play a role in scientific invention. Critical thinking is encouraged, raising questions about the practicality of experimenting on the human body everywhere. The assimilation underscores the importance of cleanliness and proper handwashing in preventing disease transmission. The essay serves as a lesson on problem-solving, advocating for continuous effort, experimentation, and scientific research over superficial study or blame.

 

 

Literal Comprehension: A Hungarian physician and a German writer Carl G. Hempel Semmelweis is the writer of this essay. When his friend had a problem that more women in the First Maternity Division of the Vienna General Hospital died from childbed fever that in the Second Maternity Division of the hospital. Though he took many new ideas and tested them to solve the problem there was no control in death. First, it was supposed that childbed fever was caused by epidemic influences. When an epidemic, cholera widespread, it was not limited to the First Division without affecting the Second division, the city of Vienna and the mothers who were admitted to the First Division after delivering the babies on the way. The second idea was that overcrowding in the First Division was the cause of a higher death rate. Patients avoided the First Division and the Second Division was more crowded because of the high death rate in the First Division.

As diet and the care of the patients in both divisions were the same, another idea was that in the First Division. It was a rough examination of patients by medical students was injurious enough to cause childbed fever. But Semmelweis showed that natural birth process was more injurious, that in the Second Division midwives examined the patients equally roughly, and that after reducing the number of medical students and their examination the death rate was not still reduced. After an accident, Semmelweis concluded that foul material from the dead body was responsible for childbed fever, and after washing hands with the chemicals before examining the patients decreased the death rate. Later Semmelweis also concluded that the dirty matter from the living beings caused childbed fever in the hospital. Therefore, proper hand washing was necessary there in the hospital.

Interpretation: As this essay is a scientific inquiry, it is based on finding a solution or the cause of death in a maternity hospital. It describes many experiments and examinations to find out the cause but at last, it is found that the dirty hands of the doctors and nurses were the main mediums for transmitting the diseases. As a scientific essay, it tells is a success story to find a problem and its results or conclusion as proved. This essay shows that the process of scientific discovery involves formulating, hypotheses, testing predictions, and an interdisciplinary search. It may also be interpreted that sometimes accidentally a chance plays an important role in scientific invention. If Kolletschka’s hand had not been injured by the medical student’s knife, Semmelweis would not have found the solution to the problem. As the nature of science, this essay also conveys a message of the steps or process of scientific discovery; just hypothesis, imagination, blame or blind faith cannot give a solution to any problem as a scientific inquiry gives.

Critical Thinking: There are many problems and their solutions in the world. Only scientific inquiries have given a practical and reliable or useful solution. But in scientific inquiry, there should be followed some steps or procedures. This essay also has given a way of thinking to find out a solution to a problem. As Semmelweis examined various ideas and at last found out the main cause of the problem, we also should try our best as many times as we can to find out the solution to any problem. Through this, we can raise some questions about this essay that is it possible to experiment human’s body everywhere every time or not?

Assimilation: This essay has focused on the procedure of finding out the solution or the main cause of the death in a hospital; with continuous effort and examination of the doctors, it is found out that the dirty hands were the main causes. This gives all of us an important message of cleanliness and good hand washing before doing any work; otherwise, we ourselves will be the cause of different diseased. This also has shown me a way how to think and find out the solution to a problem. To solve a problem trial and error method is necessary; I also got inspired to find out the solution with experiment but not with the superficial study of my problems. It gave me a message of continuous practice and effort and scientific research of any problem are needed than blame, superstitious faith, etc.

 

 A 1996 Commencement Speech

Salman Rushdie, India (1947)

Literal Comprehension: In the commencement speech titled 'A 1996 Commencement Speech,' Salman Rushdie addresses the theme of human rights and advises against yielding to falsehood and conspiracy. He recounts an incident involving Jean Kirkpatrick as a commencement speaker, where American students boycotted her speech in protest, emphasizing the importance of standing against injustice.

Rushdie reflects on his own experience at Cambridge University in 1968 when he was unjustly denied a degree due to false accusations. To receive the rightful degree, he had to humble himself and supplicate to the Vice-Chancellor. Recalling this moment, Rushdie expresses regret for his passive submission and compromise with injustice, highlighting the humiliation of having to beg for what rightfully belonged to him.

He imparts the lesson that injustice often forces individuals to plead for what is rightfully theirs. Rushdie encourages his students not to accept injustice, urging them not to surrender to inhumanity and falsehood in the pursuit of their rights. He commends Bard College for providing him refuge based on intellectual solidarity and opposition to injustice.

Rushdie advises defiance against even gods if they restrict thoughts, rights, freedom, and lives. He emphasizes the importance of being guided by one's best nature.

Interpretation: The writer may be trying to focus on the importance of justice, rights, freedom, and personal thoughts. In his speech, Rushdie suggests the students also not to accept injustice and not to surrender in front of inhumanity and stand up for our rights. He suggests defying even gods if they are injustice and if they limit our thoughts, rights, freedom, and lives. He also views that a person should always keep up his good thoughts and best natures for self-respect.

Critical thinking: Although his essay is interesting, suggestive, instructive and satirical, some ideas of the writer are doubtful. How can we defy gods in practice? Is it good to be sarcastic of the university from where we get graduation degree?

Assimilation: I am very much affected by this speech of Rushdie. It reminded me of my own past. I have also bowed down my head to the feet of injustice many times in the past to get what was rightfully mine. But this speech made me feel regret for what I have done. Is also inspired me not to accept any kind of domination, injustice, and inhumanity.

Keeping Errors at Bay Four Levels of Interacting with Text

 Keeping Errors at Bay

Bertrand Russell, England

Subject: Flax-Golden Tales

Top of Form

Literal Comprehension: In his essay, Bertrand Russell talks about the common mistakes people make in their daily lives and suggests ways to avoid them. He emphasizes the need for a careful, serious, critical, and analytical mindset to prevent errors. The essay focuses on steering clear of mistakes in everyday situations. Russell suggests that we can eliminate foolish opinions by observing relevant facts. When direct observations are not possible, comparing our ideas with others helps. Evidence and knowledge are crucial for avoiding misunderstandings. Travelling and observing different societies contribute to refining our own opinions, making us less close-minded. Having a one-sided view prevents us from finding the truth, as we may overemphasize our own beliefs. Fear and prejudice can hinder us from learning reality, so it's important to be cautious and not accept things without proper observation.

Interpretation: To make mistakes is a human trait, yet committing a mistake deliberately is not justifiable. Making errors knowingly, or being aware of the error and still proceeding, goes beyond human behavior and may be subject to punishment. The essay emphasizes the challenge of grasping the truth without a proper understanding of the matter. It contends that human beings often fail to perceive the truth because of an illusion of knowing everything without a thorough understanding. The essay suggests that our tendency to avoid comparing our ideas with those of others, coupled with unwarranted pride, leads to crimes or errors. While errors have solutions, intentionally making mistakes cannot be considered a characteristic of humanity.

Critical Thinking: Russell provides a concrete exploration of errors and their solutions, delving into the reasons behind our mistakes and offering insights on correction. Upon engaging with this narrative, I've gained understanding and developed some inquiries. The author adopts a scientific thinking approach, emphasizing the evaluation of ideas through comparison and contrast. While I align with many aspects of the essay, certain questions linger in my mind. Is it possible for anyone to completely avoid errors? How do we discern what constitutes an error and what doesn't? Can we consciously change our mindset to minimize errors? Why is it challenging for individuals to easily discern facts? How do we effectively compare our thoughts with those of others? What are the different manifestations of truth? Determining the correctness or fallacy of ideas poses a challenge. These uncertainties contribute to the prevalence of errors in people's lives.

Assimilation: Typically, we tend to believe that our actions and thoughts are correct. This essay has provided me with numerous insights into the various types of errors and their potential solutions. It has prompted me to reflect on my own life, recognizing instances where my stubbornness led me to perceive everything as right. I've now developed a greater appreciation for the perspectives of others. Understanding why people make mistakes in forming ideas has become clearer to me. A wise individual should examine situations from multiple angles, employing a comparative and multidimensional approach. I've learned that errors can occur in any endeavor, but their identification often requires careful evaluation after the fact.