Www.staunton.k12.va.us



In the following passage from The Great Influenza, an account of the 1918 flu epidemic, author John M. Barry writes about scientists and their research. Read the passage carefully. Then, in a well-written essay, analyze how Barry uses rhetorical strategies to characterize scientific research. Certainty creates strength. Certainty gives one something upon which to lean. Uncertainty creates weakness. Uncertainty makes one tentative if not fearful, and tentative steps, even when in the right direction, may not overcome significant obstacles.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. For as Claude Bernard, the great French physiologist of the nineteenth century, said, “Science teaches us to doubt.”A scientist must accept the fact that all his or her work, even beliefs, may break apart upon the sharp edge of a single laboratory finding. And just as Einstein refused to accept his own theory until his predictions were tested, one must seek out such findings. Ultimately a scientist has nothing to believe in but the process of inquiry. To move forcefully and aggressively even while uncertain requires a confidence and strength deeper than physical courage. All real scientists exist on the frontier. Even the least ambitious among them deal with the unknown, if only one step beyond the known. The best among them move deep into a wilderness region where they know almost nothing, where the very tools and techniques needed to clear the wilderness, to bring order to it, do not exist. There they probe in a disciplined way. There a single step can take them through the looking glass into a world that seems entirely different, and if they are at least partly correct their probing acts like a crystal to precipitate an order out of chaos, to create form, structure, and direction. A single step can also take one off a cliff.In the wilderness the scientist must create…everything. It is grunt work, tedious work that begins with figuring out what tools one needs and then making them. A shovel can dig up dirt but cannot penetrate rock. Would a pick be best, or would dynamite be better—or would dynamite be too indiscriminately destructive? If the rock is impenetrable, if dynamite would destroy what one is looking for, is there another way of getting information about what the rock holds? There is a stream passing over the rock. Would analyzing the water after it passes over the rock reveal anything useful? How would one analyze it?Ultimately, if the researcher succeeds, a flood of colleagues will pave roads over the path laid, and those roads will be orderly and straight, taking an investigator in minutes to a place the pioneer spent months or years looking for. And the perfect tool will be available for purchase, just as laboratory mice can now be ordered from supply houses.Not all scientific investigators can deal comfortably with uncertainty, and those who can may not be creative enough to understand and design the experiments that will illuminate a subject—to know both where and how to look. Others may lack the confidence to persist. Experiments do not simply work. Regardless of design and preparation, experiments—especially at the beginning, when one proceeds by intelligent guesswork—rarely yield the results desired. An investigator must make them work. The less known, the more one has to manipulate and even force experiments to yield an answer. Q2S1John M. Barry explains the world of science and being a scientist is all about. Barry uses a timeline body while near the end a subordination theme. Barry first uses a fact to then link to what is required for a scientist. Barry uses a timeline structure that at first explains what it takes to be a scientist up to winning recognition for an achievement. Near the end of the passage Barry uses subordination placing out an opposite view but putting it down.With his essay, Barry boxes in the reader while explaining in a step-by-step fashion, Barry uses a persuasive explanation. (102 Words)Q2S2In The Great Influenza, written by Jon M. Barry, the 1918 flu epidemic is described. Barry writes about scientists and their research using all kinds of figurative language. In the first paragraph he uses rhetorical devises to emphasize the word “uncertainty.” In the paragraph following he expands more on the topic of uncertainty. He explains that without uncertainty, a scientist wouldn’t be a true scientist because all scientists like to venture into the unknown. The word “scientist” is repeated at least once in every paragraph because the passage revolves around scientists. As shown in his fifth paragraph, he asks questions to the reader that one could possibly ask. In the following paragraph he answers them to keep the reader satisfied. Personification is used throughout the passage and he describes all his words to a flawless extent. (136 Words)Q2S3Although this essay was written about the 1918 flu epidemic, John M. Barry’s apt words invites the readers to have a better understanding of a Scientist’s research. His word choice and metaphors patiently pave a road of understanding for readers to better grasp what scientists see.Barry calmly explains that “…to be a scientist requires not only intelligence and curiosity, but passion, patience, creativity, self-sufficiency, and courage,”(lines 6-8) with characteristics that he shows throughout this essay. With his creative and intelligent form of writing the reader is pulled into the world of a scientist. Barry makes it easy for one to relate to scientist and connect with their same passion.Barry’s use of metaphors helps explain to readers the though process of a scientist. “A single step can also take one off a cliff.” shows the reader the importance of a scientist research (line 35).John M. Barry’s didactic way of speaking helps a reader to understand something that they may not normally be able to connect with. His metaphors make up great examples of what scientist may normally be faced with awed gaining the readers attention. (187 Words)Q2S4In the passage from “The Great Influenza,” John M. Barry writes about how science cannot be observed or forced to yield an answer, but observed on the frontier. He uses rhetorical strategies such as repetition, ironical tone, and rhetorical questions to give a humble account on what he thinks about how real science should be sought out in nature, and your own soul.Barry uses repetition such as “Certainty creates strength. Certainty gives one something upon which to lean” to give the effect of how important it is to have certainty and confidence in yourself in order to make you feel strong and supported. If a scientist is sure about something, he is sure to be much more confident on his ideas and beliefs.In this passage, Barry uses a periodic sentence in which he tries to keep the reader wondering about things before his present idea. “And just as Einstein refused to accept his own theory until his predictions were tested, one must seek out such findings.” Barry is using Einstein-the master genius of the 20th century—as an example of how he often thought that his theory wasn’t real until he tested it. In stating “one must seek out such findings” at the very end, adds that everyone has to test their theory (even Einstein) in order to accept that it is true. In the middle of Barry’s passage, he uses many rhetorical questions to ask and ponder what would be the best way to be certain and “prove” their theory is true. “Would a pick be best, or would dynamite be better—or would dynamite be to indiscriminately destructive?” In this question, Barry is trying to ask in an indirect way if it would be better to pick away at a theory little by little or all at once “dynamite.” He leaves that for the reader to decide.In this passage, Barry uses many rhetorical terms to characterize the natural scientific research to cause the reader to have an open mind about the subject and ponder on how certainty can lead to success. (346 Words)Q2S5Science has become the bridging point between the present and the future. Scientists strive to better society through improvements to previous discoveries of the advancement of new theories of the uncertain world. Science is a field that demands patience as well as intellectual fortitude. In this scenario, the author creates an insightful tone and uses rhetorical questions as well as antithesis, to describe the profession of science.Throughout the narrative, science is described as an event taking place on the frontier. It is in this location that scientists are patient as well as disciplined in order to reach the final goal of a new discovery. The author emphasizes the importance of being meticulous so that one might not “step of a cliff” and wreck their experiment. The author provides excellent insight into a profession that few people have come to understand. He reveals aspects that may not have been visible to others such as the determination of scientists to persist and overcome enormous setbacks and disappointments of failing some experiments. It is through this determination and work ethic that many of us have common things that are often overlooked. The ambition and skill of a scientist is often overlooked, but in this narrative it is directly shown through the reasoning and foundations of a scientist. In many fields of science, decisions making is paramount to their success and can either make an outstanding experiment or one that is invalid. The author uses rhetorical questions stringed together in paragraph three in order to emphasize the importance of decision making. The scientist must ask himself questions and provide reasoning for either using a “pick or dynamite.” The importance of decision making is only one aspect of being a scientist and is only as significant as the purpose of the scientist. The foundations of this purpose are rooted in the origins of science as described in paragraph one. In this situation, the author uses antithesis to make the distinction between “certainty and uncertainty.” Uncertainty is what the scientist is trying to make certain and certainty allows him to explore what is considered to be uncertain. This is contrasted through the antithesis and juxtaposition of two somewhat contradicting elements of certainty and uncertainty.Scientists are an important profession that dives into the unknown in order to further the advancements of the human race. Scientists of today are much like the explorers of the 15th century in the aspect that decision making and reasoning are critical to the success of the individual. The author provides enormous insight into a relatively exclusive profession. (427 Words)Q2S6In the passage, author John M. Barry characterizes scientists and what it takes to be a successful researcher. He uses anaphora, metaphors, and rhetorical questions in order to demonstrate his point that ultimately succeeding in scientific research requires patience and the ability to have courage and accept the inevitable uncertainty that accompanies science.To be a scientist is to be uncertain, to be patient, to be an inquirer. But, it is also more: “It is not the courage to venture into the unknown. It is the courage to accept—indeed, embrace—uncertainty” (8-10) A scientist is going to be uncertain, but it is the act of acknowledgement and embracing that uncertainty that allows great scientific research to exist. Barry utilizes anaphora with “It is” in order to re-iterate his point, in order to fully define “uncertainty.” It takes courage to be uncertain, and that is Barry’s point. Barry continues on and begins referring to scientific research as a “wilderness region where [scientists] know almost nothing, where the very tools and techniques needed to clear the wilderness, to bring order to it, do not exist.” (26-29) Barry uses this metaphor to illustrate the difficulties that accompany research and scientific progress and to stress the importance of having patience when dealing with those difficulties. Referring to research as a “wilderness” allows the reader to imagine just how tangled and treacherous progress can be. Research is “grunt work, tedious work,” but it has to be patiently done. Barry further demonstrates his point through rhetorical questions when discussing how best to analyze a rock: “would analyzing the water after it passes over the rock reveal anything useful? How would one analyze it?” (46-48) Rhetorical questions need no answer, but they do show that a scientist must question things patiently, that they must inquire when they are uncertain. Scientific research requires that a scientist does so. Science is uncertain and it is tedious. For research to be successful, a scientist must cope. A scientist must be patient and they must be courageous enough to acknowledge the undeniable uncertainty and embrace it. John M. Barry firmly believes in all of those concepts, and he uses several well-crafted strategies to stress their importance to the reader. (369 Words)Q2S7In Barry’s account of the field of science, he takes a different approach in presenting it. Rather than describe them as masters of knowledge, an apparently inaccurate perception that many people have, he describes them as pioneers, illuminators of the path into the wild and unknown. Many falsely believe that scientists know exactly what they’re doing and exactly what they’re looking for at any given time. But this couldn’t be farther from the truth; it’s likely that they probably know as much about it as any one of us may know. But nevertheless it is the ability to triumph in the face of such great uncertainty that distinguishes a scientist from a commoner, something that Barry carefully fabricates throughout the passage. Probably the most influential and predominant rhetorical strategy that Barry uses is his use of the extended metaphor. He describes science as a frontier, and the scientists are those who are out to explore it. By personifying science as this unpredictable, mysterious, manifestation, he is able to convey the sense of uncertainty as well as better reiterate the duties of the scientist in the process. For example, he measures the greatness of a scientist by the distance away from the known world that one may explore; the typical ones are at the edge , fearful of going any further, whereas the best of the best venture far into unknown territory, to a point where success and safe return become synonymous. To further supplicate his characterization, Barry utilizes tone and mood. His tone is very definitive, headstrong and secure. The mood remains ambiguous, even a bit fearful, at times. This is in the spirit of scientific research, where one must be confident in one’s abilities in the face of impossibility. Even experiments, means as methods of uncovering and solidifying the truth, are only successful through endless doubt and trial and error. It is a paradox; to make something certain (or dose to it), you must be willing to take something uncertain, and make it that way. It’s as if there is not one thing in the entire world that is completely certain, but rather a bunch of uncertain things made to look a certain way.There are also numerous cases of antithesis and logos. In the beginning, Barry juxtaposes certainty and uncertainty, and their inherit effects. In doing so he creates the necessary boundary to understand what science really is. Also, on an added note, he retains moods of uncertainty by establishing an idea, than providing evidence that undermines it, such as in paragraph 2-3. To help visualize a scenario such as this, he also breaks down the process of inquiry into steps, giving the reader a chance to step inside of a scientist’s shoes and understanding the meaning of Barry’s “science.” By employing metaphors, irony, and paradox, Barry is able to effectively create the sense that science is not what it is cut out to be. It is strange, for by learning you only increase your doubt, quite the opposite effect of traditional meaning. But in a strange way it also makes sense, for by learning to doubt, we also learn to keep looking and not be satisfied with ourselves, hence the never-ending quest for the certain truth, if it even exists. (543 Words)Q2S8Scientist are among the most important professionals in modern society. Through methodic, empirical research, they gather data and draw conclusions based on discovered correlations or causations. Although somewhat robotic, their method (appropriately called the “scientific” method) is something in which many see great beauty; or, as John Barry notes in The Great Influenza, something that requires “strength deeper than physical courage.”Barry describes scientists in a respectful, perhaps even reverent, way. His point, essentially, is that theirs is the most tedious of all grunt work; that which scientist must do, and yet, there exists within it a methodic beauty. Being a scientist requires intellectual bravery and courage, to the extent that uncertainty is strength. In the first two paragraphs, Barry emphasizes this point of view with masterful use of figurative language. The first four sentences combine repetition, parallel structure, and floating opposites (antithesis) to sharply distinguish between certainty and uncertainty. He illustrates, through his repetition and antithesis, that scientists, although disadvantaged in that they don not operate with solid facts (as, do, say mathematics), they use said uncertainty to fuel their effective method and make discoveries; the likes of which most cannot even fathom. It is this uncertainty, as his second paragraph’s parallel structure points out, that is their strength; this absolute “lost” feeling is why their discoveries are so important, because they’re so incredibly novel that they’re completely unfathomable.The third paragraph analyzes further the scientist’s strength, helped in its efforts by the author’s appeal to pathos and ethos. He alludes to Einstein to point out the necessity of scientific critique, and he characterizes scientific strength as glorious in all its manifestations. The author further emphasizes this point through his use of analogies and an extended metaphor in the fifth paragraph, defining science as essentially the study of tools; of efficiency and refined precision. This serves to underline his previous point about the beauty of the scientific method, again emphasized at the end of the passage. Barry notes that the more that’s known, the higher the stakes. When humanity stumbled upon the electron, it was like bumping into a lamp in a dark room; once we discovered its significance (which is initially entirely unknown), an entire world opened up (electronics), and the room brightened. Barry characterizes scientific research as painstakingly precise, like looking for the molecular composition of a needle in a haystack stuck in a dark room. Yet if this unknown, this x-factor, that sets the stakes, for, as many have observed, nothing gained without risk is worth gaining. The overpowering futility of their efforts is what makes science so beautiful; because while futile, at least it is methodically and scientifically futile; so that when discoveries are made, we can be certain they will consist of nothing less than compacted greatness. (463 Words)Q2S9Scientific research is made to be done methodically. There is even a widely known “scientific method” created in the 15th century based on reason and common sense. It was created from a desire to make the unknown known. As Barry describes the scientific process, he says that uncertainty, in the world of the unknown, must be made a tool—a weapon, even—against one’s own convictions. However, that concept is very ethereal, so Barry utilizes comparisons and logical hypothetical situations to convey that idea.Barry begins by contrasting the strength and conviction of certainty with the weakness and fear of uncertainty to better define the term of uncertainty. He established direction in his second paragraph, as he lists qualities the ideal scientists should have, he ends with courage, and with courage he runs off and further defines how he will use that term. Courage, to Barry, is not “venture[ing] into the unknown,” which is a polite way of saying “charging into God-knows-what, head down and arms flailing,” but rather the courage to face a total shattering of a character and all of one’s beliefs upon the “sharp edge of a single finding.” To be a good scientist, Barry maintains in his third paragraph, one must reject all that is unproven. This is especially difficult to do, speaking from personal experience, because the thought of the possibility that there is no after-life, that all that follows is nonexistence, chills me to the bone and puts a rightful fear of death in my heart. Barry uses the example of Einstein to express the point of accepting a total reversal of beliefs in an attempt to persuade the reader that to face a destruction of one’s convictions requires a far greater courage, to conceive of uncertainty as an ally rather than a foe.Having established the role of uncertainty, Barry shifts into an analogy comparing scientists to pioneers. A pioneer marches into chaos, making order with “tools…[that] do not exist.” This analogy is used to relate his continuing argument back to his thesis about uncertainty—out of chaos, a scientist, despite being uncertain and having to use nonexistent tools, must make sense out of the wilderness. Barry then finishes the fourth paragraph with a two-sentence antithesis, to an almost humorously ironic effect. The former sentence is long, elaborate, and relates the finding of the truth to a crystal that illuminates the road for colleagues. And then quite bluntly, he provides the inverse result, which is the equivalent of falling off a cliff, an image reminiscent of Wile E. Coyote, who himself is persistent, methodical, and courageous in pursuit of his goal. Barry’s intent with the reversal is to instill, once more, the idea of fear and uncertainty in the reader.Barry’s fifth paragraph is full of questions, literally. The questions do have a purpose, though. While it is to be expected that questions in writing such as this are rhetorical, these question have a short and deflected sense to them, as though the writer was bouncing from idea to idea very quickly. Barry’s purpose in writing these questions is to simulate the thought process of the pioneer scientist—very uncertain, very entropic.The analogy finally ends with the scientist’s success. Once progress has been made, order achieved, and certainty restored, other scientists rush past him to delve into whatever uncertainty is left, similar to how, in Einstein’s wake, hundreds of scientist surged forward, digging at astrophysics like never before.In that small paragraph, though, there is a hint of criticism in Barry’s diction, referring to the post-pioneer scientist as a “flood,” their paved roads as simplistically “orderly and straight,” and remarking that their tools will be ready for them. However, considering Barry concedes that not all scientists can be so courageous in the following paragraph, it is a very subtle judgment at best.Barry’s concession that not all researchers are pioneers is done in short offerings of potential flaws, done in the hope that the net hovering over those researchers being criticized is a broad and inoffensive one. The transition to the fact that experiments do not always work is made to connect again to uncertainty. The fact that experiments fail can be “manipulated and force[d] to yield an answer” is itself uncertain in its attempt to fabricate certainty. In the end, Barry managed to evince that the only certainty in science is uncertainty, and doing so using, which were most effective, very uncertain questions. (742 Words) ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download