Scientific language

Science as a whole is deemed to be straightforward and precise ,and no matter which region you may be from, the culture you identify with or what languages you speak, the concepts within the scientific community and the area of study should remain the same.

It is known that science has it’s own jargon, meaning a group of special words or expressions used particularly for a group, which may sometimes be difficult for others to understand. Both readings assigned for this blog post written by Caled A. Scharf and Philip Ball discuss another component of scientific language, which is the use of figurative language in science (in this case metaphors) each taking a stand of the argument. 

It is certainly easy to get carried away when using metaphors as it could confuse the reader, but could also give the reader a better understanding of the topic as well as make it more enjoyable. All individuals do not understand quantitive reasoning and scientific knowledge and the fact that a metaphor may trigger one’s imagination could make them understand, appreciate and value science more. Not all areas in science are built merely on quantitative facts, but also some beyond anything us as humans could have lived.

That being said such practices could cause what is called the “pathetic fallacy” which is the attribution of human feelings and responses to inanimate things or animals, especially in art and literature. One popular example of this is the “selfish gene” proposed by biologist Richard Dawkins and his metaphor although gave the idea he was trying to convey, also reminds us that genes are not selfish in the same way people are as they are merely heritable factors consisting of a sequence of DNA that occupies a specific location on a chromosome and has a specific trait.

Writers of science want to be able to convey their message in the most understandable way possible, as it is their main goal to be able to publish their findings or previous knowledge and pass it on to others. Figurative language will help it stick more into the brain vividly but this will also cause it to more resistant to change as the human language and brain are both imperfect and very resistant to change. 

In other domains such as literature metaphors are to be poetic, in politics it is to argument and slightly manipulate by analogy, but it's purpose in science is until not fully identified. In all domains good metaphors are golden (that was a metaphor itself) and bad metaphors are just painful. It is up to the writer that has enough expertise on the content and the audience that should know what amount and quality of the figurative language is good enough to be published.

Science and the public

Science dominates the field of knowledge in our modern day society and this domination is the result of uninterrupted progress discovered and led by scientists. Scientists seek to construct reliable knowledge of the natural world by means of careful observations combined with reason and imagination which will possibly be beneficial for mankind. 

Scientific knowledge is being discovered on a regular basis, which could lead us to wonder to what extent should scientific knowledge be open to the public? Should the general public be aware of findings, should it be kept secret or be exclusively to the scientific world?

Keeping the public of scientific research and progress will allow the general population to be able to have more scientific knowledge and develop more their capacity which can allow them to have the capability to themselves make scientific discoveries and be more educated individuals. Keeping scientific research open is also a risk as if it purposed for the government or private companies and the population is aware of it there could be issues in theft and using the newer technologies and discoveries for negative and harmful uses, or selling them on the black market for a greater price it is worth.

History has shown that it takes around 300 hundred years to accept scientific discoveries, showing that social context can truly affect methods and findings.The researching of socially unacceptable topics could get the scientist into trouble by their family, friends or even the government. For example it is illegal to do abortions in Saudi Arabia so researching this topic or conducting experiments can get them punished. The scientist will have to pursue a different topic or have their reputation tarnished, but if general public would not be aware, it would be easier for scientist to pursue the experiment. 

There is no direct answer on whether the public should be aware of findings, as them being aware can empower or limitate resources, methods, findings and ideology of the experiment of the researcher. It is fair to say that each situation differs, and could possibly be up to the scientist to want to publish their work or not, and them also having obligation on the scientific world and respecting ethics concerning their findings.