Brian Caswell's 'A Cage Of Butterflies'

A Cage of Butterflies, by Brian Caswell, is a science fiction book. Dr Larsen starts an institute for children who are geniuses so he can study them. Within this context Society Is represented as a place where those who are different have much to fear than those who are normal. Young people brought in this institute are affected in many ways when they tried to participate in normal sociality outside the institute. Once inside they faced different fears not about exclusion but the risk of exploitation and being used for research and financial gain. There challenge is to take control of their own futures to live their own lives outside the institute in a wold where there is a lot of judgment.

For example,it say, “Before the Board of Regents announced its decision, the negative press about Southam’s work had gotten the attention of the NIH, which funded his research and required it's investigators to get consent for all studies involving humans.” Another example,it says, “Beecher published a detailed list of the twenty-two worst offenders, including researchers who'd injected children with hepatitis and others who'd poisoned patients under anesthesia using carbon dioxide. Southam’s study was included as example number 17.” These pieces of textual evidence show how NIH found Southam and other scientists were doing unethical

In his nonfiction text, The Great Influenza, John M. Barry explains that scientific research is an uncertain process. Barry supports this explanation by using rhetorical strategies such as repetition and a metaphor. Barry’s purpose is to prove scientific research is a confident process that allows one to be courageous on the side of uncertainty. Barry uses formal tone with his audience that goes beyond researchers.

In the passage from “The Great Influenza,” by John M. Barry, he characterizes scientific research through the utilization of figurative language, organization, and rhetorical appeals. Barry asserts us that a scientist’s notion and beliefs can easily be undermined by uncertainty, while certainty can enhance their experimental views and confidence. Throughout this excerpt, Barry uses rhetorical devices to explain the qualities of scientists that enable them to achieve higher levels of success.

Glenn Irwin’s “Two Butterflies” demonstrates a movement in age and development of experience through the images of two distinct butterflies. The ideas Irwin articulates about age and experience with this imagery also serve to show the disconnect between nature and civilization over time. The poem is divided into two stanzas: morning and evening. Likewise, there are two butterflies: morning and evening. The morning butterfly has only just completed his transition stage. He is faced with the beginning of life and the task to make a connection to civilization. The evening butterfly is well into her final life stage. She has gone through the experiences the morning butterfly has not; her connection with civilization has been previously established.

Attention Getting Device: John Barry, in his writing, The Great Influenza, he states, “To be a scientist requires not only intelligence and curiosity, but passion, patience, creativity, self-sufficiency, and courage. It is not the courage to venture into the unknown. It is the courage to accept — indeed, embrace — uncertainty” (Barry 2). During all eras of time, scientists have endured enormous amounts of adversity. Scientists have had to maintain a wide variety of skills in several different areas to assist them in different circumstances that they endure. Scientists must have persistence, due to their main activity being trial and error. This means that once they have failed, they most certainly have to be willing to try it again. A scientist also must posses acceptance, as there will be times when they receive results that are not their predictions. Scientist must obtain acceptance to come to terms with the results found in their laboratory. In John Barry’s The Great Influenza, he utilizes metonymy and rhetorical questioning to characterize scientific research.

Brilliant author, John M. Barry, once proclaimed, “Uncertainty makes one tentative if not fearful, and tentative steps, even when in the right direction, may not overcome significant obstacles… It is the courage to accept—indeed, embrace—uncertainty” (Barry 3-5 & 9-10). These quotes can be traced back to John M. Barry’s passage of “The Great Influenza,” where he writes an account about the 1918 flu epidemic that struck the world. In his account, he goes into further explanation about the rigors and fulfillment of being a scientist, and simultaneously, discusses the tedious process of their research. Ultimately, society is educated that the life of a scientist should not be absolute, but it should consist of persistence and courage. In John M. Barry’s “The Great Influenza,” the author employs innovative metaphors and unique rhetorical questions to portray scientific research.

The central ethical dilemma of many of the films and stories we looked at this semester hinged on the question of whether or not man should employ his knowledge of genetics and science to engineer or revive a species that had become extinct, usually due to natural processes. As a science major myself, it was interesting to explore these themes and the scenarios presented in each individual piece of literature. Questionable ethics run rampant in stories such as Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Jurassic Park. “None but those who have experienced them can conceive of the enticements of science. In other studies you go as far as others have gone before you, and there is nothing more to know; but in a scientific pursuit there

He explains why UCTs are as popular as they are in modern society, and why people should nevertheless disregard and approach them with caution. What Keeley refers to as “virtues” are the reason for the popularity of UCTs. He gives the virtue of explanatory reach as the first and main reason for UCTs popularity, which is the account of all knowledge including errant data. This is in stark contrast to the received theory, which is imperfect by nature. This quality of UCTs is particularly attractive because it appeals to human rationality by allowing for no loopholes. Keely argues that errant data alone is not significant enough, and that a theory should never fit all of the data. This leads into one of the main points, concerning falsifiability and skepticism. Unfalsifiability is acceptable when the item or person under investigation is not actively trying to escape from the investigator. Keeley contends that the problem is not the innate unfalsifiability, but rather the increasing amount of skepticism required. Keely seeks a hole in the concept of conspiracy theories that accounts for a person’s innate sense that belief in a particular conspiracy theory is not justified. In the case of the natural sciences, falsifiability is acceptable because of the rigorous protocols in place, and therefore, we are warranted in believing scientific claims.

This critique written by Roberto Gonzalez Echevarria of In the Time of the Butterflies focuses mainly on the political facts that are not apparent in the novel. He states that Alvarez makes her novel appear blurry, not making it a “serious historical fiction.” However, the critical commentary that Echevarria made would not necessarily apply to the film due to the fact that Alvarez’s intentions are to initially expose readers to life in the Dominican Republic under the control of Trujillo, rather than have it be a serious historical fictional novel with facts and real life events. In fact, the film focused more on the historical aspect of this time period unlike Alvarez’s novel. It provided slow motion slide shows of Trujillo’s

Science plays an integral role in the development and findings of many great things that we can benefit from. Integrity along with a specific set of moral standards must always be followed in order to ensure the end result enables a healthy environment for all whom wish to benefit from such studies. Integrity must always play and be the most essential key role in scientific research. In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1831) and Stevenson’s The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1886) one is able to conclude that integrity must be maintained while conducting scientific research as a lack of can result in the creation of monsters.

“Animal Testing Is Bad Science.” Animal Rights, edited by Noah Berlatsky, Greenhaven Press, 2015. Current Controversies. Opposing Viewpoints In Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/EJ3010954207/OVIC?u=scschools&sid=OVIC&xid=96434ce4. Accessed 25 Apr. 2018. Originally published as “Animal Testing Is Bad Science:

John M. Barry, the author of The Great Influenza, writes about scientists and the obstacles they face. He claims that scientists are explorers in the wilderness that is science. There is no charted path to go down and no one to follow. Scientists will always be uncertain, however scientists should possess certain characteristics to overcome the doubt. He appeals to our emotions to explain the necessary characteristics a scientist has to posses. John M. Barry uses anaphoras, motifs, and pathos in his definition of what scientists do.

New economic activities are emerging that are representative of technocapitalism. Biotechnology, nanotechnology, bioinformatics, software design, genomics, molecular computing and bio-robotics, for example, are likely to be hallmarks of the twenty-first century, as electronics and aerospace were in the twentieth. This new ecology of activities and sectors is more reliant on creativity and knowledge than any of the old industries of industrial capitalism. These new sectors are providing the technologies that the twenty-first century will most likely be associated with. Corporations that live or die by their global research capabilities, where research is far more important than any other function, and where corporate appropriation of research results is the key to profit, control of these new sectors. Turning research creativity into a commodity thereby acquires fundamental importance in the global drive for greater corporate profit and power, in much the same way that turning raw materials and factory labor into commodities was fundamental for the corporations of

After the great disappointment, the journal Nature investigated in depth its system of review and publication of articles. They found some inconsistencies in their system, which the worst consequence could be the loss of confidence in science by the citizens. Furthermore, the RIKEN centre also became the target of criticism, which focused on the lack of ethics and the decline of the institution in recent years.