May 17 2009
Let’s Celebrate
As we end our first year of IB Chemistry I can’t help but reflect on the quality of thinking demonstrated by the authors of Chemical Paradigms.
From our initial conversations about the nature of science we have grown into community of independent thinkers, each with our own unique voice. We have tackled some complex science topics, depended our knowledge and understanding, thought about how and what we know, broadened our perspectives, and most importantly shown an openness to new ideas and different ways of thinking.
To celebrate our creativity and passion lets recognize the blogs which you think most expanded our thinking about science, represent the clarity of ideas and sound reasoning we value, were the most interesting, captivated our imagination, offered the strongest justification and empowered us to think (and possibly even act) differently.
So, spend a moment reflecting. Nominate a particular blog and explain why you think it best represents the voice of Chemical Paradigms. Remember to focus on the big ideas and the contribution made to expanding our knowledge.
11 responses so far
Powered by FireStats
This year’s been a fun exploration in the ways of science, and I, as a contributor to this blog, would like to mention a post which I personally enjoyed:
Sean’s post regarding Swine flu and Ben’s following reply really put the matter of the so-called “global epidemic” into perspective, a more realistic perspective, in my opinion, than the multitude of news headlines which have elevated the issue to the world plane. Yes, as Sean noted, the swine flu is caused by a virus, and, just as so many viruses have haunted mankind, this strain, too, has caused a crisis today. Fear, as Sean pointed out, has caused people to turn to drastic ends, some superstitious at best, all in the hopes of avoiding the swine flu virus. As a point of TOK, it was interesting to see, as mentioned, how powerful emotion can manipulate us into the strangest of actions.
But the post stimulates a more powerful discussion regarding the future of medicine and whether or not the miracle potion which cures all disease will ever be found. It motivated Ben enough to write back – that’s what I enjoy so much about this blog: the ability to articulate oneself regarding a certain topic by backing it up with background research, helping us to better comprehend our own stance on the issue before we too blatantly express ourselves. Everyone must research equally their topic in order to comment appropriately on it, referencing certain websites. Never, for instance, does emotion or bias rule too heavily upon our thoughts. Never does our argument stem from inexistent principles or of poor opinionated reasoning. This is the voice of Chemical Paradigms, and in this lies its appeal.
The blog I nominate is not necessarily a post, but a discussion captured in blog replies. The discussion has epitomized the voice of Chemical Paradigms for me, individual students exploring and sharing their views on science.
Initially the post, Ambiguous Science, written by me, concerned the ambiguity of sources and so called “scientific knowledge”, using as an example, information found online about the physiological effects of mobile phones on the brain. Cajo then replied, raising her own questions on how we should discern between sources. Max then added to the conversation, considering the nature of bias in popular news sources, speculating that we must tackle the problem of websites and news casts as being aligned with a political opinion by diversifying the range of sources we consider. Michael then took the discussion in another direction, questioning the authority of sources in general, saying that empiricism was in some ways a flawed belief system as it required trust in certain basic scientific axioms.
The breadth of the discussion as well as the clarity of the points raised in that discussion, to me, represent what the Chemical Paradigm blog is meant to be.
Over the course of the past few months, since the establishment of Chemical Paradigms, many detailed blogs and thoughtful replies have been posted here.
Most of them resemble hours of work, to provide detailed descriptions, reliable information, and profound evaluation. Almost every one of them, I can say, deserves praise for effort. However, seeing it is a interactive blog that stresses not only on descriptive scientific research, but also thought and interest, I have decided to base my nomination on the three following criteria: Organization, Relevance to Real Life, and Analysis of Implications.
Following that, I have chosen to nominate Kyle’s “To Sleep or not to Sleep“. It was, for me, a pleasure to read.
First of all, it is clear and concise. Offering an introduction which linked personal connection to the readers, it immediately caught my attention. Then, shifting to the science, the post clearly listed the viewpoints scientists have on the issue. Finally, it concludes with the implications.
Sleep is a common experience shared amongst everyone, and, as more people move toward the busy urban life and sleep less and less, has even become a common issue. Kyle captures that, and uses it to lead to an interesting concern: Why do we sleep?
Finally, the language used permitted the post to flow naturally to its conclusion. The concept that science is not perfect is perhaps not new, but in this case it is well expressed and well supported with solid evidence.
This type of writing should serve as an example for the rest of us, for it not only captures the key features which Chemical Paradigm tries to show, but is well presented and thus becomes an interesting and worthwhile read.
To blog is not to simply relay facts, nor is it to blab personal gossip. A blog is not someone’s personal diary of critiques and cynicisms. It is not an encyclopedia of intangible knowledge. A blog is a no-loitering zone.
Now that it is clear what a blog is not, I will tell you what it is. A good blog is an interesting discussion of a complex topic. It is on the continuum somewhere between fact and opinion. It cannot be disproved nor confirmed. Essentially, it is an extended online conversation with a plethora of ideas and points of views. Now that the school year is finishing, I too feel that it is a good time to be remiscent. We in IB Chemistry not only blogged our hearts out, but also blogged in the name of science. There was a lot of questions and clarification, facts and opinions, but most of all, a new take on the world around us. While I think that there are dozens of impressive posts that deserve commemoration, there is one in particular that shows what it really means to blog, and this post is: anna’s post “Skepticism in Action”.
The very nature of the chosen topic is ideal for our blogging purposes. It reveals a clear connection to its implications on science, it cannot be proven nor disproven, and it. Ultimately, it is the epitome of our blogging history, provoking many related topics to come. I’d give the runner up position to cajo’s post on “Phlogiston”, mostly because it really spoked to me and prompt me to write a response. Posts like these two really give depth to Chemical Paradigms. I am looking forward to the posts to come in our final round of this year. Perhaps there is one yet to come that will blow us all out of the water. We can all hope!
What is Chemical Paradigms? From dictionary.com a paradigm is “a set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality for the community that shares them…” Over the past year, we have accrued a profusion of blog posts that really demonstrates what a paradigm is. Although there were many posts that I felt represented a paradigm, Sean’s post I believe was the epitome of what Chemical Paradigms is all about.
Since we, high school IB Chemistry students, are the authors of the blog, I wanted something that we could all related to as my choice. Sean’s first blog post in the beginning of the year “what is high school science really about?” spurred 5 comments, including 3 that weren’t members of IB Chemistry. He caused me to rethink what I am doing in high school; we’re learning to learn, because information is always changing! His post pulls us back and reminds us the reason we are in high school. Sean’s post truly illustrates the “…concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality” of us, IB Chemistry students.
A representative post for this blog should follow many criteria. The post should be have an abundant amount of reliable information on the subject which is also easy to read to anyone. But the post should not only relay scientific material, but have opinions as well. The post should analyze why the information posted is related to our daily lives, and also touch on what implications it has on scientific research as a whole. Lastly, this post should be available to further discussion, and could state points which could have many view points. I nominate Ben’s post “Why the Sad Face?” for the best representative post for the voice of Chemical Paradigms. This post provides proficient information on how emotions are related to the brain, and the information is easy to understand. Also, the post describes how this information has changed our view on human nature from subjective to scientific. Science has turned something which has always thought as not a science into a science. Our moods can now described as hormones and brain activity, lowering the view of the control we have over ourselves. The best part of this post is it really makes us wonder and prompts further discussion, which is the main point of this blog.
I read through all the posts, and I mean all of the posts. It took awhile, but I have found out what captivated my interest in terms of blog posts: inventions. Any post on a new invention that discussed its implications, considerations, limitations, and inner workings, never failed to impress me. The inquisitive nature, what I see as characteristic of a true scientist, was mirrored in my classmates’ abilities to seize an idea and be truly passionate about it. Posts such as Y-lynn’s “Real Life Ray Guns” and “Galaxy Zoo” emphasized the impact of the technology on human conduction of warfare, and shifted our scientific paradigms when we realized that the galaxies were closer than we’d thought. Kyle’s “Hydrophobia” worked with concepts we had previously understood to underscore the significance of a water repelling material. My “Turning the Light on Invisibility” was an enthusiastic review of invisibility, and my “Into Thin Air” created a picture of the conversion of CO2 into liquid fuel and the necessity for practicality in invention. Sean explored ethanol as new fuel in “You Can’t Drink and Drive, but What About Your Car?”, and discussed the environmental impacts of such a technology, while also carefully outlining the limitations of this product. Finally, although Sean isn’t in TOK, he really did a wonderful job of exploring future implications of invention in “Is There Anything Left to be Invented?”. With this, a year of discovering ingenious inventions, concluded.
All that to say: I really haven’t decided on the one post that stunned me into submission. There were really so many excellent evaluations of invention, and the class really seemed to develop an awareness of the importance of considering implications, especially in science. As you might be able to see, “implications” is my favorite TOK word. Maybe it’s a vivid imagination, or maybe it’s simply the belief that the value of science lies in the investigation of an ever-changing world, something that every one of these posts appreciated.
Throughout the course of this year, this blog has produced a vast amount of posts as well as generated more than its fair share of comments and discussion. Looking back through the numerous blog posts, there were just too many that I singled out either for their interesting topic, eye-opening implications, or even engaging voice. Although each of these characteristics alone makes for an interesting post, all of them together make something even better. What I did notice was that Y-Lynn managed to achieve this meld more than once and I could always count on one of her posts for an interesting yet informative read. This is why I choose to nominate an author, Y-Lynn, rather than a specific post as the representative of Chemical Paradigms.
For me, what makes Y-Lynn’s posts the most enticing is the voice that shines through each post, almost to the point where one can hear her voice while reading one of her posts. Furthermore, despite the fact that she chooses to tackle abstract and often perplexing topics, in the posts “A Knot in String Theory” or “Real-Life Ray Guns,” the ideas are explained concisely and basically preventing puzzlement from detracting from the post’s thoughts. And it is the thoughts left the behind after each post that further set Y-Lynn apart. Although, the implications are expressed tersely using a paragraph at most, they leave the reader to form their own opinions as well as contemplate those opinions long after the brief read. Overall, Y-Lynn introduces both enlightening yet interactive elements into each post making for a great read every time.
I have to agree with the other contributors to this blog, the posts they’ve nominated have provided much to talk about, each with its own interesting twist or idea. For me the most interesting posts have been those involving ethics and questioning “science”. Clearly, this blog concerns science-related topics, and it’s maintained by a chemistry class, so it’s safe to say we at least appreciate science. This is why I find it so neat that we can find things to question, or even criticize, because we’re evaluating something we respect as a valuable source of knowledge.
In any case, it was posts like Ben’s “A Twist of Fate” that caught my attention. Ben brought up the idea that maybe pseudoscience isn’t a bad thing, when as chemistry students many of us have come to value the cold, hard, factual science above all else when it comes to reliability. Chris’s “Ambiguous Science” further addresses the topic, asking how science can be trusted when nowadays everything can be called “science” anyway. I agree with his praise for “Ambiguous Science” in bringing up several comments, because I think they were attributed to the questioning nature of the post.
Controversy can fuel and ignite conversation, and it’s interesting to find it in an “area of knowledge”, as TOK would put it, that is generally seen as logical and unbiased- science. The posts that question, then, are the ones that get my attention, and that make me see science in a different light.
It goes without saying that the width and depth of the analysis that goes on in this blog is astounding. We’ve covered a whole range of topics, from invisibility cloaks (Mira’s “Turning the Light on Invisibility“) to the very nature of time and space (Victor’s “Spacetime“). Most of the posts are also informative and very entertaining, which itself is no mean feat!
The posts that really grabbed my attention however, were the ones that explored how we use “science” in our daily lives. Ben’s post “A Twist of Fate” and Chris’s “Ambiguous Science” best demonstrate this. Ben writes that we put science on a pedestal, and often completely disregard “non-scientific” sources of information even though they may display another side to truth. The term “science” has a lot of rhetorical clout, and as Chris demonstrates, it can be abused. Many people throw around the term “science” to give their arguments extra credence, even if the “science” they cite isn’t very sound. Worse still, it can confuse other information-seeking people, as credible science mixes and is sometimes contradicted by this pseudoscience. It’s a sobering thought, but it broadens our scope of “science” and relates it back to our everyday experiences, which is why I think these two posts best embody the voice of Chemical Paradigms.
At the start of the year, I mainly viewed Chemical Paradigms as a place where we would post information concerning chemistry, perhaps mainly along the lines of what we happen to be covering in class. Boy was I wrong.
As soon as the first few posts appeared, I quickly realized that Chemical Paradigms is much, much more than a simple extension of our class. Indeed, this blog has evolved into a collection of very inspired and inspiring posts, from a diverse collection of authors, each with his or her own voice. The material covered in these posts has proved to be amazingly diverse, as well. Thus, it is very difficult for me to nominate one specific post that I believe best embodies the spirit of Chemical Paradigms. So, I am going to mention a few of the posts that I feel have been the most interesting and inspiring to me.
First, posts such as Y-Lynn’s “A Knot in the String” and Victor’s “Spacetime” effectively introduce us to perhaps lesser known and/or understood areas of science. Other posts, such as Mira’s “Into Thin Air” touch on the involvement of science in relation to the ecological dangers that surround our planet. I especially appreciated Jesse’s “The Price to be Cheap” and Kyle’s “To Sleep or Not to sleep”, as they draw the connection between scientific knowledge and real-life implications, for better or for worse. This diversity and wealth of interests and perspectives is what, in my opinion, embodies the spirit of Chemical Paradigms.