write an essay on uses and abuses of science

Skip to main content
Skip to secondary menu
Skip to primary sidebar
Skip to footer

A Plus Topper

Improve your Grades

Uses And Abuses Of Science Essay | Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science for Students and Children in English

February 14, 2024 by Prasanna

Uses And Abuses Of Science Essay – Given below is a Long and Short Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science of competitive exams, kids and students belonging to classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. The Uses And Abuses Of Science essay 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 500 words in English helps the students with their class assignments, comprehension tasks, and even for competitive examinations.

You can also find more Essay Writing articles on events, persons, sports, technology and many more.

Long Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science 500+ Words for Kids and Students in English

Just as fire is a good slave but a bad master, science too has its positive as well as negative aspects. Science is the most revolutionary thing that has been devised by man. Science does not rely on supposition and imagination, but is an organised body of knowledge based on facts. Earth Science was one of the first to be studied and we have some a long way from the days when the Earth was believed to be flat.

People are always curious to learn more about the world surrounding them. This has brought about fascinating discoveries and inventions not only in the fields of biology, astronomy, chemistry but in our daily lives too. Vast improvement in the field of medicine has resulted in the controlling of epidemics, and increasing the average life expectancy. Diseases like influenza, chickenpox or typhoid are no longer fatal and leprosy and even some forms of cancer are now curable. The crippling disease, polio, has been eradicated from most parts of the world.

We have better drugs and instruments but men are becoming weak in terms of physique and mind. What an irony of fate it is! Today, we suffer from sensitive ‘ear’, sensitive lung’ and a sensitive liver’ due to fast speed, smoky atmosphere and dusty roads. So, science makes mankind happy by its latest achievements but it also makes us unhappy when it shows distructive power. Science can be used for gaining happiness but science put to wrong and negative use, can cause unimaginable disasters.

Science has given us such comfrots as were unimaginable a few years ago. Today, we switch on the radio and listen to music. We have electricity, telephone, television, washing machines, refrigerators, air-conditioning plants, satellites, cellular phones, metro trains, fast trains, aircraft and the most modern medicine systems. All these things have made the life of man very comfortable. The electric fans, cinemas, cars, trams, mobile phones and jumbo aircraft are among other scientific inventions and discoveries that have made life easy and comfortable.

The industrial revolution has been a landmark in the development of many countries. Rapid industrialisation required more markets and that gave rise to the concept of colonisation. Today, the major concern with most developed countries is the management of their industrial waste. More recently, the concern has shifted to the disposal of radioactive waste. Scientists have discovered nuclear energy which is a non-polluting source of energy, but there has been an increase in the number of disasters caused by radioactive waste.

Cases like Chernobyl, Hiroshima-Nagasaki and the Bhopal Gas Tragedy highlight the ill-effects of nuclear energy. Though presently it is the best alternative for the increasing requirement of energy, we cannot overlook the ever-increasing use, or rather misuse, of nuclear energy and development of sophisticated and powerful nuclear weapons.

Short Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science 300 Words for Kids and Students in English

Science has progressed in both the domains – constructive as well as destructive. The latest triumphs of science try to remove the evils of disease and death. These have also increased the threat to human life. On the destructive side, science has invented weapons that are most dreadful and disastrous. The inventions of laser beams, neutron bomb and hydrogen bombs have increased the chances of human destruction. If these weapons are put to use, they would spell disaster for the entire mankind.

One of the most frequent and popular question which is often asked is, “Are scientific inventions making us happier?” Science has definitely made life easier for man. Telecommunication and technology have made the world, not just a small place, but a tiny world. We can talk to a person across the world sitting in front of our webcams, we can send pictures and videos in minutes over the net and we can carry a world of information in a tiny microchip. However, we must keep in mind that wrongful exploitation of science can result in disastrous consequences like nuclear wars, high levels of atmospheric pollution and a widespread loss of life and property.

As modern age is an age of science, man has become calculative and mechanical. Science is advancing and it is thwarting our civilisation. In the kingdom of science, words like love, affection and sentiments are fast becoming alien. So what is the use of science for man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul? Spiritualism is on the wane while materialism is on the rise. Philosophy, culture and poetry are fading from human life because of the rapid advancement of science.

Therefore, the opinion remains divided on the science being a boon or bane. No one claims for certain that science is complete happiness or an impending curse. However, the latest triumphs and victories of science need to be properly utilised, otherwise, they can bring certain death and destruction to the human race.

Picture Dictionary
English Speech
English Slogans
English Letter Writing
English Essay Writing
English Textbook Answers
Types of Certificates
ICSE Solutions
Selina ICSE Solutions
ML Aggarwal Solutions
HSSLive Plus One
HSSLive Plus Two
Kerala SSLC
Distance Education

NCERT Books

Essay on Uses and Abuses of Science | Uses and Abuses of Science Essay for Students and Children in English

Essay on Uses and Abuses of Science: This is the age of science. Science has changed entire world. It is not the same world that our ancestors lived in. If they were to return today, they would certainly not be able to recognise the place. Today we have electricity, telephones, TVs, medicines, computers and the Internet, cars, airplanes lazer photography and much more, which will seem like wonders to someone from that age.

Students can find more English Essay Writing Topics, Ideas, Easy Tips to Write Essay Writing and many more.

Essay on Uses and Abuses of Science 300 Words for Kids and Students in English

Below we have given a short essay on Uses and Abuses of Science is for Classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. This short essay on the topic is suitable for students of class 6 and below.

Science has made our lives comfortable and convenient in 76 many ways. It has enabled us to save time in all aspects of our lives, from cooking to washing, travelling and communicating. It has made the world smaller and more accessible to us. Science seems to have conquered time and distance.

It is because of science that we are able to cope better with illnesses today. This has made our lives easier and increased our lifespan. In fact, there is no area of modem life in which science has not made an impact.

Almost every day, either new inventions are being reported or existing ones are being improved upon. They are being made faster, safer and even more efficient.

Besides the advantages, there are also some disadvantages of science. The race to develop the most lethal and advanced weapons and bombs like nuclear bombs can lead to total destmction of mankind. We have become too dependent on machines. We do minimal manual or physical work, which is not only making us less capable of doing work manually but also taking a toll on our health. World has certainly become a global village but ironically we are becoming less social. We may watch

TV or chat with friends over mobile or Internet but we hardly have time for our family members, any social gatherings or to visit any social club. Modem technology used in industries and transportation is leading to depeletion of natural resources and has also increased the level of pollution.

It is in our hands to mm science into a curse or boon for us. If we use science in moderation and with discretion we can certainly make science beneficial to us. Let’s not be the slaves of machines or science, rather use them to help us make life comfortable, healthy and peaceful.

The Use and Abuse of Science

First Online: 21 March 2020

Cite this chapter

write an essay on uses and abuses of science

Paul Needham 7

Part of the book series: Synthese Library ((SYLI,volume 423))

273 Accesses

Moral issues concerning the use and abuse of science are broached in this chapter. Scientists have responsibilities to conduct their research in such a way as to respect and acknowledge the contributions of others and to present their work honestly and without seeking to avoid criticism by misleadingly overestimating random error. The onus on scientists of a wider social responsibility for informing the public and guiding decision makers is also discussed, together with the reciprocal responsibilities of decision makers to ensure that they are informed and able to understand the bearing of new knowledge.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime
Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Compact, lightweight edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info
Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

But a more general claim by Koyré that it would not have been possible to carry out any of the experiments and observations Galileo reported goes too far. Settle ( 1961 ) repeated an experiment on inclined planes in accordance with Galileo’s description, which Koyré had described as completely worthless, and found the ingenious device for measuring time gave quite precise results—certainly precise enough to attain the relations of proportion between distance and times that Galileo claimed. Koyré maintained further that Galileo’s procedure couldn’t possibly furnish a reasonable value of the constant of proportionality appearing in the algebraic expression of this relation of proportion. But as Settle points out, this modern way of expressing the law of free fall by writing distance as a function of time was not the way Galileo expressed the relation, which was weaker and didn’t entail all that the modern functional expression does.

Note that in modern usage introduced towards the end of Sect. 2.2 , we should say “precision” rather than “accuracy”.

Arp, H. C., Furböridge, G., Hoyle, F., Narlikar, J. V., & Wickramasinghe, N. C. (1990). The extragalactic universe: An alternative view. Nature, 346 , 807–812.

Article Google Scholar

Babbage, C. (1830). Reflections on the decline of science in England . London: B. Fellows; Reprinted Gregg International, Farnborough, 1969.

Google Scholar

Benveniste, J. (1988). Dr. Jacques Benveniste replies. Nature, 334 , 291.

Brush, S. G. (1989). Prediction and theory evaluation: The case of light bending. Science, 246 , 1124–1129.

Collins, H., & Pinch, T. (1998). The Golem: What you should know about science (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Davenas, E., et al. (1988). Human basophil degranulation triggered by very dilute antiserum against IgE. Nature, 333 , 816–818. See also editorial comment, p. 787 and subsequent discussion, 334, 285–291.

Earman, J., & Glymour, C. (1980). Relativity and eclipses: The British eclipse expeditions of 1919 and their predecesssors. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 11 , 49–85.

Franklin. A. (1986). The neglect of experiment . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Book Google Scholar

Galileo, G. (1638 [1954]). Dialogue concerning two new sciences (trans: Crew, H., de Savio, A.). New York: Dover.

Kitcher, P. (2001). Science, truth and democracy . New York: Oxford University Press.

Klotz, I. M. (1980). The N-ray affair. Scientific American, 242 , 122–131.

Lang, S. (1998). Challenges . New York: Springer.

Maddox, J., Randi, J., & Stewart, W. W. (1988). ‘High-dilution’ experiments a delusion. Nature, 334 , 287–290.

Metzger, H., & Dreskin, S. (1988). Only the smile is left. Nature, 334 , 375. See also editorial comment, p. 367.

Naylor, R. (1974). Galileo’s simple pendulum. Physis, 16 (1974), 32–46.

Newman, W. R. (1996). The alchemical sources of Robert Boyle’s corpuscular philosophy. Annals of Science, 53 , 567–585.

Settle, T. B. (1961). An experiment in the history of science. Science, 133 , 19–23.

Westfall, R. S. (1980). Never at rest: A biography of Isaac Newton . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

White, H. O. (1938). Plagiarism and imitation during the English renaissance . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Philosophy, University of Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden

Paul Needham

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Needham, P. (2020). The Use and Abuse of Science. In: Getting to Know the World Scientifically. Synthese Library, vol 423. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40216-7_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40216-7_4

Published : 21 March 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-40215-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-40216-7

eBook Packages : Religion and Philosophy Philosophy and Religion (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Essay on Uses and abuses of science in 200 – 300 words

Essay on Uses and Abuse of science:

We are living in the age of science. Scientific inventions have revolutionized human life. They have brought about remarkable changes in our ways of living and make the world a better and happier place for us.

Science has made our domestic life comfortable. Science has discovered many useful things. The invention of the Gramophone, Radio , Television , Cinema , Computer , etc. has added to our pleasure and made life interesting.

Science has reduced human labour. It has invented various machines for different kinds of jobs. Machines sweep and cook for us. Electric fans and coolers protect us against the heat of summer. Refrigeration and cold storage have helped the preservation of food articles and make possible their exchange between different countries.

Science has proved to be a great blessing in agriculture , industry , and in fields of medicine and surgery . It is no more a thing of surprise that electricity can be produced from the wind.

Besides all this, science has also invented bombs , guns, missiles, etc. These things can prove destructive if they go in the hands of some foolish people.

So, science is both, useful and harmful. If we use it in a proper way, it can make our life happy. But always remember that the wrong way use of science may very dangerous for the world.

Essay on The Television
Essay on Delhi metropolitan city

Essay on Uses and abuses of science in 200 – 300 words PDF

3 thoughts on “essay on uses and abuses of science in 200 300 words”.

Please send me to my gamil

Hi.. Thanks for Visiting our website if you want to know more about writing a essay on a uses and abuses of science more about Different types of essay writting then this blog will help you. if you have any query you can comment.

Essay On Uses and Abuses of Science

Post category: Essay
Reading time: 4 mins read

Use of science brought about a great change:

He discovered the process for tending plants. He grew crops and stored the surplus. He came from cave to cottage and from cottage to pucca house. He knew the tending of useful animals and put them to his service. He made many works of invention. He grew cotton were due to proper uses of science.

Modern use of science: Uses of science are now inseparable even from out dayto-day life. With the help of science and technology we have made pin to space-craft. We have made highly complicated machines for large-scale productions. We have conquered over time and distance. We are conquering disease and sickness. Radio and telecommunications, XRay and electricity, rotary and railways are all the works of science. So at present the uses of science are many and varied.

Abuses of science: Modern man has begun to abuse his scientific knowledge, invention of atom bomb is the burning example of it. Abuse of science will lead to destruction of mankind.

Essay On Non – Cooperative Hospital Staff
Essay On Parents as Friends
Essay On Nuclear Development And Its Impact
Essay On Non-renewable Resources
Essay On Necessity Is The Mother Of Invention
Essay On Problem of Unemployment
Essay On Prize Distribution Function
Essay On Preventive Human Efforts of Reducing Global Warming
Essay On Prevention Is Better Than Cure

Please Share This Share this content

Opens in a new window

Essay on importance of english language, essay on lessons that history teaches.

Essay On Swami Dayanand Saraswati

Essay on desert, essay on holidays and how to spend them, essay on foremost competition – the olympic games, leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Essays About Science: Top 12 Examples and Prompts

Science can explain almost every aspect of our lives; if you want to write essays about science, start by reading our guide.

The word “science” comes from the Latin word Scientia or “knowledge,” It does indeed leave us with no shortage of knowledge as it advances to extraordinary levels. It is present in almost every aspect of our lives, allowing us to live the way we do today and helping us improve society.

In the 21st century, we see science everywhere. It has given us the technology we deem “essential” today, from our mobile phones to air conditioning units to lightbulbs and refrigerators. Yet, it has also allowed us to learn so much about the unknown, such as the endless vacuum of space and the ocean’s mysterious depths. It is, without a doubt, a vehicle for humanity to obtain knowledge and use this knowledge to flourish.

To start writing essays about science, look at some of our featured essay examples below.

IMAGE	PRODUCT
	Grammarly
	ProWritingAid

1. The challenging environment for science in the 21st century by Nithaya Chetty

2. disadvantages of science by ella gray, 3. reflections from a nobel winner: scientists need time to make discoveries by donna strickland.

4. The fact of cloning by Cesar Hill

5. T. Rex Like You Haven’t Seen Him: With Feathers by Jason Farago

6. common, cheap ingredients can break down some ‘forever chemicals’ by jude coleman, 1. what is science, 2. a noteworthy scientist, 3. why is it important to study science, 4. are robots a net positive for society, 5. types of sciences, 6. science’s role in warfare.

“Open-ended, unfettered science in its purest form has, over the centuries, been pursued in the interests of understanding nature in a fundamental way, and long may that continue. Scientific ideas and discoveries have often been very successfully exploited for commercial gain and societal improvements, and much of the science system today the world over is designed to push scientists in the direction of more relevance.”

For South Africa to prosper, Chetty encourages cooperation and innovation among scientists. He discusses several problems the country faces, including the politicization of research, a weak economy, and misuse of scientific discoveries. These challenges, he believes, can be overcome if the nation works as one and with the international community and if the education system is improved.

“Technology can make people lazy. Many people are already dependent and embrace this technology. Like students playing computer games instead of going to school or study. Technology also brings us privacy issues. From cell phone signal interceptions to email hacking, people are now worried about their once private information becoming public knowledge and making profit out of video scandals.”

Gray discusses the adverse effects technology, a science product, has had on human life and society. These include pollution, the inability to communicate properly, and laziness.

She also acknowledges that technology has made life easier for almost everyone but believes that technology, as it is used now, is detrimental; more responsible use of technology is ideal.

“We must give scientists the opportunity through funding and time to pursue curiosity-based, long-term, basic-science research. Work that does not have direct ramifications for industry or our economy is also worthy. There’s no telling what can come from supporting a curious mind trying to discover something new.”

Strickland, a Nobel Prize winner, explains that a great scientific discovery can only come with ample time for scientists to research, using her work as an example. She describes her work on chirped pulse amplification and its possible applications, including removing brain tumors. Her Nobel-awarded work was done over a long time, and scientists must be afforded ample time and funding to make breakthroughs like hers.

4. The fact of cloning by Cesar Hill

“Any research into human cloning would eventually need to be tested on humans. Cloning might be used to create a “perfect human”. Cloning might have a detrimental effect family relationship. However the debate over cloning has more pros out weighting the cons, giving us a over site of the many advantages cloning has and the effects of it as well. Cloning has many ups and downs nevertheless there are many different ways in which it can be used to adapt and analyse new ways of medicine.”

Hill details both the pros and cons of cloning. It can be used for medical purposes and help us understand genetics more, perhaps even allowing us to prevent genetic diseases in children. However, it is expensive, and many oppose it on religious grounds. Regardless, Hill believes that the process has more advantages than disadvantages and is a net good.

“For the kids who will throng this new exhibition, and who will adore this show’s colorful animations and fossilized dino poop, T. rex may still appear to be a thrilling monster. But staring in the eyes of the feather-flecked annihilators here, adults may have a more uncanny feeling of identification with the beasts at the pinnacle of the food chain. You can be a killer of unprecedented savagery, but the climate always takes the coup de grâce.”

In his essay, Farago reviews an exhibition on the Tyrannosaurus Rex involving an important scientific discovery: it was a feathered dinosaur. He details the different displays in the exhibition, including models of other dinosaurs that helped scientists realize that the T-Rex had feathers.

“Understanding this mechanism is just one step in undoing forever chemicals, Dichtel’s team said. And more research is needed: There are other classes of PFAS that require their own solutions. This process wouldn’t work to tackle PFAS out in the environment, because it requires a concentrated amount of the chemicals. But it could one day be used in wastewater treatment plants, where the pollutants could be filtered out of the water, concentrated and then broken down.”

Coleman explains a discovery by which scientists were able to break down a perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substance, a “forever chemical” dangerous to the environment. He explains how they could break the chemical bond and turn the “forever chemical” into something harmless. This is important because pollution can be reduced significantly, particularly in the water.

Writing Prompts on Essays about Science

“Science” is quite a broad term and encompasses many concepts and definitions. Define science, explain what it involves and how we can use it, and give examples of how it is present in the world. If you want, you can also briefly discuss what science means to you personally.

Many individuals have made remarkable scientific discoveries, contributing to the wealth of knowledge we have acquired through science. For your essay, choose one scientist you feel has made a noteworthy contribution to their field. Then, give a brief background on the scientists and explain the discovery or invention that makes them essential.

Consider what it means to study science: how is it relevant now? What lessons can we learn from science? Then, examine the presence of science in today’s world and write about the importance of science in our day-to-day lives- be sure to give examples to support your points. Finally, in your essay, be sure to keep in mind the times we are living in today.

Essays about science: Are robots a net positive for society

When we think of science, robots are often one of the first things that come to mind. However, there is much to discuss regarding safety, especially artificial intelligence. Discuss the pros and cons of robots and AI, then conclude whether or not the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. Finally, provide adequate evidence to reinforce your argument and explain it in detail.

From biology to chemistry to physics, science has many branches, each dealing with different aspects of the world and universe. Choose one branch of science and then explain what it is, define basic concepts under this science, and give examples of how it is applied: Are any inventions requiring it? How about something we know today thanks to scientific discovery? Answer these questions in your own words for a compelling essay.

Undoubtedly, technology developed using science has had devastating effects, from nuclear weapons to self-flying fighter jets to deadly new guns and tanks. Examine scientific developments’ role in the war: Do they make it more brutal? Or do they reduce the casualties? Make sure to conduct ample research before writing your essay; this topic is debatable.

For help with your essays, check out our round-up of the best essay checkers .

If you’re looking for inspiration, check out our round-up of essay topics about nature .

Publications
CoCom Lists
Search for...

The use and abuse of science and technology: rethinking dual-use

23 October 2018 1 March 2019

For over a decade now, I have be rolling around the concept of dual-use in my research, much like how a kitten plays with a fluff ball in the sunbeams of a room. What is the term? I’m mildly interested in it, though it might appear to some others that it’s all I focus on. I like rolling it around, batting it about to see how it will react. I also notice how different it appears in different lights. When I’m engaged in research on security concerns in nuclear settings, the duality presents itself as that between energy production and weapons production. In computing/cyber, it is between defensive and offensive applications. In conventional export controls, it is between civil and military applications.

Many of these contexts for understanding what the ‘dual’ is in dual-use shifted after 2001 to incorporate a focus on terrorism as an ‘other’ category. Perhaps this has been taken up most strongly in biology, where an initial focus on the ‘dual-use dilemma’ of biological research was laid out in the 2004 Fink Report, Biotechnology Research in an Age of Terrorism , focusing on how “the same technologies can be used legitimately for human betterment or misused for bioterrorism” (p. 15).

Ten years ago, I would have said that all of these ways of understanding dual-use are curious, and that they all pivoted towards terrorism in the same way, given their different starting points, was even curiouser.* In my research now, I am pivoting to thinking about the limitations of the concept of dual-use itself. Why focus on duality at all?

To work through this question, in the last week or so I have turned back to Foucault, particularly to his lectures on “Society must be defended” . I’ve been really taken with his analysis of the othering that is at the heart of the construction and normalisation of power, regardless of whether that power is centered around a sovereign or distributed throughout a society. “Dual-use” as a term in use today, especially in biology, has been developed, however unconsciously, to structure a group of potentially unruly people (scientists and bioengineers) around a set of practices that employ themselves in the process of governing security concerns in the life sciences. The point that most people don’t know what the ‘dual’ is in ‘dual-use’ when first introduced to it is a very sly tactic to ‘reveal’ to that person a whole world of biosecurity threats that sit beneath the thin veneer of intended beneficial use of advances in biology. This world of threats is presented as real, as definitely out there and in need of constant vigilance to keep at bay.

It is a process of indoctrinating students and researchers into the current dominant narrative of biosecurity governance. The duality, in its general form, might then be considered as a balancing not of military and civil applications of science and technology, but as balancing ‘use’ and ‘abuse’. Normalising researchers into a biopolitics of biosecurity is about creating a system of relations between them and the rest of society that governs themselves. ‘Abuse’ here can then refer to non-socially sanctioned uses of biology. Is it ok for DARPA to be developing biotechnologies? Is it ok for companies to be developing massive synthesising capacity when capacity to understand things like pathogenicity are still not clearly known? Whether these are uses or abuses of a line of innovation can only be answered within particular epistemes.

Characterising the concept of dual-use this way, we can more clearly see a stumbling block that isn’t very widely acknowledged in biosecurity governance right now: to define what constitutes an abuse of power of biotechnology is to agree on the terms of reference for the debate. Do we? There seems to be broad, though perhaps more tenuous than some would like, consensus for not using biology as a weapon (the Biological Weapons Convention). But where novel biological security concerns are going to come from is not entirely clear. A system of governing based on bright lines around known objects of concern, like the American policies on Dual-Use Research of Concern , relies on a central authority to define a threat, but on a distributed network of practitioners to internalize that threat and govern themselves. Many of them, however, do not perceive the threat in the way the state does, and what do you do about threats that are not yet known?

There are two different understandings of security that are at play in the dual-use debate these days: one that has a clear authority searching for the objective list of objects of concern and clear examples of what will happen when rules about their use are disobeyed; and one that has a network of varying levels and kinds of awareness and attention to security governance of science and technology, coupled with a situated and responsive responsibility for addressing concerns as they are identified. I don’t think we yet appreciate the radically different forms of governing these are based on.

* We are indeed going down a Lewis Carroll rabbit hole.

benefits of science essay with quotations

Benefits of science essay , uses and abuses of science.

Science is the systematic classification of experience.

Science is nothing but an image of truth

All war is the symptom of man's failure as a think animal

The future belongs to science and those who make friends with science

No comments:

Abusing science

Joseph d. mcinerney.

1 Biological Sciences Curriculum Study, National Coalition for Health Professional Education in Genetics, American Society of Human Genetics, Lutherville MD, USA

Michael J. Dougherty

2 Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora CO, USA

The perversion of science in the interest of ideology and greed is not a new phenomenon, but a public that is largely scientifically illiterate now is besieged by “alternative facts” and well‐designed efforts to discredit legitimate science on topics ranging from vaccines to climate change. Here, we examine three topics rooted in biology and biomedicine—creationism, harms from tobacco, and opioid addiction—to show that those purveying misinformation employ a consistent pattern of intellectual dishonesty to delegitimize science that challenges their ideological positions. Individual scientists and the scientific community at large should confront and counter these attacks on the intellectual integrity that is at the heart of the scientific enterprise.

“The foundation of morality is to have done, once and for all, with lying.” Thomas Henry Huxley, keynote address at the inauguration of Johns Hopkins University 12 September 1876

1. INTRODUCTION

In August 2017, the National Association of Biology Teachers (NABT), in the United States, published an editorial titled “Teaching Biology in the Age of ‘Alternative Facts’”. 1 Biology teachers in the U.S. certainly were accustomed to being besieged by the alternative facts of creationism, especially as that movement morphed from its religious foundations to the charades of “creation science” and “intelligent design,” failed attempts to make the Christian creation myth less overtly violative of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment.

Given that history, why would NABT’s board feel compelled to issue a broader statement on “alternative facts” and the challenges they present to teachers and students? The editorial explains as follows:

In an age of “fake news” and “alternative facts,” our society is constantly bombarded with disinformation designed to undermine the principles under which scientific inquiry operates and cast doubt on conclusions derived through the scientific enterprise…. Our members understand that the recent efforts to cast doubt on the science of climate change or the process of evolution are no more valid than past campaigns that attempted to cast doubt on the deleterious health effects of tobacco use or the benefits of immunization for individuals and society….When science denialism goes unchallenged, each instance not only impacts that specific area of science, but serves to undermine all of science, with dramatic and harmful effects. 1

As the editorial indicates, the range of scientific topics threatened by disinformation is broad, and the 2020 coronavirus pandemic quickly became subject to the same threats, ranging from inaccurate, even dangerous, speculation issued by the White House 2 to frank scams designed to bilk a nervous public out of its money. 3

When confronting such misinformation, is it sufficient for scientists simply to remind the public that science does not recognize “alternative facts” and designates them as “errors”? We think not. When confronting willful misinformation, it is important to be clear about the objectives of those who are inventing and promulgating “alternative facts” in the current political climate. Those responsible are not seeking to engage the public in abstruse and nuanced discussions about epistemology. Their intent, rather, is to delegitimize valid science, to obfuscate the issues at hand, and to confuse a public that has low scientific literacy. 4 , 5 , 6 To counter those efforts, the public needs to understand the often‐malign motives of the individuals and entities responsible, and it needs the tools to distinguish valid information from sheer nonsense.

Motives for the invention and promulgation of “alternative facts” often have their roots in ideology—political, religious, economic, and otherwise. In trying to combat willful misinformation and “alternative facts,” therefore, one must do more than provide the correct information. The “deficit model” of improving science literacy by merely providing accurate content is known to be inadequate because scientific knowledge is linked to attitudes about science. 5 The history of the evolution/creation controversy makes clear, for example, that scientists cannot simply “throw facts at the problem,” as Eugenie Scott, long‐time director of the National Center for Science Education, often said, and the steady accumulation of evidence that supports descent with modification, including comparative genomic sequencing, has had little or no impact on creationists. Both of us have asked creationists to identify scientific evidence that would convince them of the validity of evolution. The unequivocal answer has been, “there is none.”

In the face of such intransigence, one must consider the best use of time, intellectual energy, and resources, and one must understand and address the ideologies that make its adherents embrace erroneous information and that leave them refractory to legitimate science. Further, one must be clear on the meaning of “ideology” itself, especially in the context of science‐related controversies.

Throughout this paper, our definition of ideology will follow that of David Joravsky, developed in The Lysenko Affair , 7 his detailed analysis of one of history's most notorious and long‐lived ideological attacks on the integrity of science. According to Joravsky:

When we call a belief “ideological,” we are saying at least three things about it: although it is unverified or unverifiable, it is accepted as verified by a particular group, because it performs social functions for that group. “Group” is used loosely to indicate such aggregations as parties, professions, classes, or nations. “Because” is also used loosely, to indicate a functional correlation rather than a strictly causal connection between acceptance of a belief and other social processes. 7

The intent of the several examples that follow is to demonstrate the pattern of willful ignorance and duplicity that underlies assaults on the integrity of science driven by ideology. There are other examples, of course, but those we have chosen have their roots in the abuse of biology and biomedicine. For each topic we review briefly the underlying science, falsehoods promulgated by the abusers, intended audience(s), mechanisms for distribution, underlying ideologies, damage, and potential repair.

2. CREATIONISM

Perhaps no issue at the interface of biology and American society has the staying power and pervasive cultural reach of creationism and its factual and ideological conflicts with evolution theory. The conflicts derive largely from the unending growth of scientific and technological knowledge that contradicts the pleasant creationist fictions of Judeo‐Christian scripture and their accounts of the origin of the universe and life on earth.

Readers of this journal know that evolutionary biology and its related disciplines such as geology posit an ancient age for the universe, our planet, and its biota. Evolution also demonstrates the relatedness of all species through descent with modification and the appearance of H . sapiens as a product of the same natural processes that produced all other life on earth. Charles Darwin established the mutability of species and the centrality of natural selection in the generation of earth's biodiversity and in the appearance of design in living things. 8 , 9

Although it is not monolithic – there are varieties of creationism – the creationist belief system is rooted in a broad, interrelated network of falsehoods that challenge virtually all assumptions of evolution theory and seek to affirm scriptural accounts of life's origin and diversity. The Genesis account of creation is, according to its adherents, the true and inspired word of God. Creationist literature asserts that the universe and life on earth are anything but ancient; young‐earth creationists have settled on roughly 6000 years. Species are said to be immutable and were specially created by a supernatural entity, the God of Judeo‐Christian scripture. Intelligent design, the most recent putatively scientific iteration of creationism, leaves the designer unnamed so as to escape legal sanction in court cases that adjudicate creationism's religious intent. According to creationists, H . sapiens was created by God in his image. Furthermore, the fit of a species to its niche is claimed to be evidence of an intelligent designer, not the result of cumulative, iterative selection acting on naturally occurring inherited variation.

Creationism's underlying ideology is a powerful and toxic blend of religion and social engineering, performing social functions for those who insist on the validity and authority of revealed knowledge and those with a commitment to a religious foundation for the basic structure of society, including governance. The relentless drive to insert creationism into public schools reflects the desire of its adherents to ensure that public education reflects sectarian principles. 10 , 11

A secondary motivation, if not precisely an ideology in the Joravsky sense of the term, is greed. Individuals and entities whose educational materials promote creationist perspectives, for example, stand to profit from adoption of those materials by religious institutions or by public schools whose administrations support creationist perspectives in the curriculum. Similarly, those who run creationist theme parks such as the Ark Encounter and the Creation Museum, both in Kentucky, derive revenue from those attractions, 12 notwithstanding their scientific bankruptcy.

Intended audiences for creationism are expansive and reflect the underlying ideology. The general public, students, and teachers, for example, are targets of creationist content that seeks to support the validity and acceptance of the movement's underlying religious perspectives. On the other hand, creationists often target school boards, state legislatures, and the courts at all levels in their continuing, but largely unsuccessful efforts to secure political and legal sanctions for the inclusion of creationist content in public institutions.

Distribution of creationist ideology occurs through well‐established religious institutions, especially fundamentalist Christian churches in the United States, and through their associated print and electronic media. In Islamic countries such as Turkey, creationist textbooks have reflected the perspectives of leading American creationist organizations and have enjoyed support of the national government, 13 in this case with the intent of weakening long‐standing public support for a secular society and government.

Creationist organizations in the U.S., such as Answers in Genesis and the Discovery Institute, produce “research” that purports to demonstrate the scientific validity of creationism, though the relevant work products rarely if ever find their way into legitimate, peer‐reviewed scientific journals. The aggrieved authors claim discipline‐wide conspiracies on the part of scientists to bar creationist “research” from the scientific literature, a charge that itself performs a social function by bolstering the assertion that religious freedom is under attack by a secular society.

The mainstream media often has been complicit in the promulgation of creationist views by its insistence on “presenting both sides of the evolution/creationism controversy,” a classic example of the false equivalence of some competing ideas. In reality, there are not two equal sides of this issue; there is science and there is pseudoscience and mysticism.

Creationist propaganda calls the cadence on a march toward ignorance for thousands of members of the adult public and for thousands of students who are exposed to mysticism masquerading as science. This assault on scientific integrity damages the public's understanding of biology in particular. It is, of course, possible to teach biology without addressing evolution—it happens all the time 14 —but it is not possible to understand biology if one does not realize that evolution is the central organizing concept of the entire discipline. 15

Beyond biology, creationist propaganda damages science in general in at least three ways. First, creationists assert repeatedly that “evolution is only a theory”, 16 a claim that reduces a theory to little more than an ephemeral guess, when science actually views a theory as a compelling conceptual framework that explains and organizes a large body of observations and experimental results. Indeed, “theories are the end points of science”, 17 not the speculative beginnings. Second, creationism begins with a set of conclusions and acknowledges only data that support them, a perversion of deductive reasoning. Science, by contrast, relies on a combination of (honest) deductive processes, which use questions and hypothesis‐testing to go where the data lead, even if the destination is not what one had hoped, and inductive processes. Indeed, Darwin's work was itself a monument to the power of inductive reasoning as he collected detailed observations over decades until he was able to shape them into a general theory, arguably the most impressive act of synthetic thinking in the history of biology. Third, the use of political and legislative tactics to compel inclusion of creationism in the public‐school curriculum circumvents the standard processes by which scientific content is vetted, accepted as part of the corpus of scientific knowledge, and, ultimately, incorporated into science education.

Finally, creationism does serious damage to secular societies and governance by seeking to overturn the underlying assumptions of separation of church and state, and to religion by forcing it to reject overwhelming scientific evidence and to adhere to patently erroneous—even ridiculous—propositions to explain the history and nature of life on earth.

Repair of the damage to science and society done by creationism is problematic given that surveys show public attitudes toward evolution have remained virtually unchanged for decades. 18 About half of the American public, for example, still accepts that all life on earth was created withing the last 10,000 years by a supernatural entity and has remained unchanged since that time. Damage control, especially in the United States, may be the only real option for science and scientists because, as Gary Wills 19 has written, creationism will never disappear because “the Bible will never stop being the central book of Western civilization.”

Scientists and science educators who have dealt with the leaders of the creationist movement for many years know that it generally is pointless to argue with them; they are essentially impervious to scientific data and to reason. The better use of time and resources is to determine where these leaders are attempting to influence policies—educational, political, legal—and to meet the battle there. The law, for example, clearly is on the side of science, 20 and one should use it to blunt attempts to insert religious dogma into the science curriculum.

Too often, working scientists fail to take creationist efforts seriously, dismissing them as so absurd as to be unworthy of attention. History shows that view to be dangerously mistaken, and scientists should be willing to help oppose any attempts to insert creationist dogma into science education.

One should not, however, tackle these issues without substantive, experienced assistance. The National Center for Science Education ( https://ncse.ngo/ ) is a very good place to start when looking for such help. Furthermore, scientists, no matter how well versed in evolution theory, should resist invitations to debate creationists. Such events are not really debates—creationists are unconstrained by the truth—but rather performances by creationist hucksters. A classic example of the willful perversion of science in such events is the claim that the second law of thermodynamics precludes evolution. That assertion was standard debate fare for the late Duane Gish, former director of the oxymoronic Institute for Creation Research. Gish, who held a PhD in biochemistry from University of California, Berkeley, clearly knew better, but he perpetuated the lie nonetheless before lay audiences.

There still is benefit and hope in dealing with students, some of whom have been sold the false notion that they must choose between evolution and their faith. Experienced educators who are knowledgeable in biology and scripture can help guide such students through this challenge, but that skill requires more than an understanding of evolution; it requires as well a deep understanding of the social functions creationism performs for the believer.

3. SMOKING IS HARMLESS

Tobacco has a long history in America, beginning with its cultivation by Native Americans, but the commercialization of tobacco by early British colonists—and the profits it generated—would provide, centuries later, an incentive for the abuse of science using sophisticated methods that now serve as a playbook for other industries and ideologies. Despite tobacco's pre‐Revolutionary origins as a commodity, it was not until the early twentieth century that cigarettes replaced chewing tobacco as the major consumer tobacco product. Before long, rapidly increasing lung cancer diagnoses, which had been rare, began to raise concerns about the harmful effects of smoking. 21

Studies from the 1920s through the 1940s linked smoking with lung cancer, but these had been retrospective and relied heavily on smokers’ self‐reported—and often unreliable—use of cigarettes, which allowed tobacco companies to criticize any potential cause and effect relationship. The results of the first large prospective study were published in an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1954, which demonstrated significant increases in deaths among cigarette smokers due to cancer and heart disease. 22 The authors wrote that “… we are of the opinion that the associations found between regular cigarette smoking and death rates from diseases of the coronary arteries and between regular cigarette smoking and death rates from lung cancer reflect cause and effect relationships.”

Additional studies supported those results, and now we know a great deal more about both the hazards of tobacco use and the mechanisms by which those harms are effected. There are more than 7000 chemicals in smoked tobacco, hundreds of which are harmful and at least 69 of which are carcinogenic. The harmful effects occur when cells absorb these chemicals, which then damage DNA and disrupt normal function. The changes can contribute not only to cardiovascular disease and cancer but to a variety of other diseases, such as immune system disorders. 23 Smoking during pregnancy is a major contributor to low‐birth weight babies and preterm births. 24

Tobacco companies, rather than respecting the emerging science, were already manipulating it toward ends that would compromise public health. According to court rulings in the landmark trial of “Big Tobacco,” nicotine levels had been manipulated in cigarettes since at least 1954 to encourage smokers to smoke more. 25 Leaders of the major companies lied about this fact for decades, including in hearings before Congress. 26 As far back as 1964, the Surgeon General of the U.S. linked cigarette smoking and disease, and tobacco companies lied about this as well even when their own research showed it to be true. Companies also used false advertising to promote low‐tar cigarettes as less harmful than regular cigarettes, a tactic specially designed for older smokers to prevent them from quitting. 27 Older, current smokers, of course, were not the only target audience for tobacco companies. R.J. Reynolds’ egregious behavior in cultivating youth smokers through its “Joe Camel” advertising campaign has been well documented, and in 1997, after a run of nine years, the campaign was ruled by the Federal Trade Commission to have violated federal law. According to the FTC, “after the campaign began the percentage of kids who smoked Camels became larger than the percentage of adults who smoked Camels”. 28

The distribution of Big Tobacco's messages to promote smoking or to deny its harms were not limited to traditional advertising, such as print ads and event sponsorships. In late 1953, working through leading a public relations agency, Hill and Knowlton, Big Tobacco created an industry‐sponsored research organization, the Tobacco Industry Research Committee (TIRC), that was promoted as independent but was, in fact, wholly controlled by the industry. 29 Similar to the organizations that would later promote creation science and intelligent design, TIRC worked to find data in support of a conclusion, in this case the conclusion that smoking was not harmful. One way this was accomplished was by recruiting prominent scientists as leaders, funding scientists who were skeptical about the emerging health consensus, and then using their results in counter‐messaging. 30 Industry‐funded research then, as now, presents potential conflicts of interest, and not all scientists are equally sensitive to, or respectful of, such conflicts. Another goal of TIRC‐funded projects was to undermine mainstream research studies that did not support conclusions favored by TIRC. Common tactics included highlighting flaws in methodology or gaps in understanding the mechanisms of cancer, 29 which were later adapted by creationists (e.g., playing up “gaps” in transitional fossils). According to Brandt, 29 “The TIRC marks one of the most intensive efforts by an industry to derail independent science in modern history.”

The ultimate motive for these efforts at scientific obfuscation was not a religious or social ideology as it is for creationists, which, though misguided, at least has the merit of sincerity. The motive here is rank profit, even at the expense of tobacco customers’ life and health, but the false‐science “belief system” of Big Tobacco still satisfies Joravsky's definition of ideology. Their science is wrong (i.e., unverified); it is accepted as verified by tobacco executives and presumably some smokers; and it performs a social function, for example justifying an economic system that employs thousands. Profit may be the ultimate motive for the tobacco industry, but the cynical, proximate means to that end was far more sophisticated than creationists’ appeal to biblical literalism. According to Brandt:

“Hill & Knowlton [the public relations agency] had successfully produced uncertainty in the face of a powerful scientific consensus. So long as this uncertainty could be maintained, so long as the industry could claim ‘‘not proven,’’ it would be positioned to fight any attempts to assert regulatory authority over the industry. Without their claims of no proof and doubt, the companies would be highly vulnerable in two crucial venues: regulatory politics and litigation.” 29

Eventually scientific proof—achieved honestly—overwhelmed the disreputable science and doubt suffered a serious, but perhaps not fatal, blow. As the tide turned against smoking, the tobacco industry faced both greater regulatory control and lawsuits won by plaintiffs. The damage, however, had been done. Millions of American smokers are addicted to nicotine, and the harms caused by smoking are by now familiar. Even today, after sharp drops in the number of smokers, an estimated 480,000 people die annually from cigarettes in the U.S. More than 90 percent of lung cancer and 80 percent of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is caused by smoking. 31 Smoking is also estimated to cost the U.S. $170 billion per year in direct medical costs, and $300 billion overall. 32

Public health officials have been trying for decades to reduce the health and economic toll of smoking by supporting campaigns to help current smokers quit and to prevent smoking in the young. Given that 95 percent of tobacco smokers began before they were age 21, the most‐effective way to reduce harm is to prevent the development of a new generation of smokers. 33

Unfortunately, we now see some of the same Big Tobacco tactics being used to raise doubts about the potential harms of e‐cigarettes, which are essentially nicotine‐delivery devices. Juul, the largest of the e‐cigarette companies, is now owned in large part by Altria, the parent company of Philip Morris, and Vuse is owned by Reynolds American. These Big Tobacco players have an obvious interest in maintaining, and growing, the pool of people addicted to nicotine, and claims that e‐cigarettes are intended primarily to help adults quit smoking are undercut by the companies’ marketing.

Indeed, regulators are alarmed by the popularity of vaping among minors, which was driven largely by first‐wave products with fruit and candy flavors that are appealing to children. E‐cigarette use jumped 78 percent among high schoolers and 48 percent among middle‐schoolers in just one year, from 2017 to 2018. In a statement of concern from the Food and Drug Administration, then‐commissioner Scott Gottlieb outlined steps he intended to take to prevent the use of e‐cigarettes by children. 33 Predictably, lobbyists for tobacco companies, including Altria and Reynolds American, have aligned against legislation to regulate and tax e‐cigarettes. 34

It still is too early to tell whether e‐cigarette companies will attempt to corrupt science in the systematic ways that tobacco companies used to promote smoking. Scientists, public health advocates, and educators, however, should be prepared to counter such disinformation campaigns. K‐12 education, public and private, must do a better job teaching the methods and nature of science, not just its content, but long lag times and an ever‐increasing number of important science issues currently being undermined (e.g., anti‐vaxx, climate change) suggest this will not be sufficient. Efforts should include enlisting the media, traditional and social, to help educate the public about the differences between honest science and the intellectually dishonest “science” peddled by those with alternative motives. Money from pro‐science philanthropists to support such efforts and promotion by key influencers may help level the playing field.

4. FOLLOWING A COMMON PLAYBOOK

Creationism and the hoax of harmless smoking are hardly the only examples of science corrupted in the service of ideologies unrelated to science. With some variation, the tactics used so successfully by creationists and Big Tobacco have been adopted and used by other groups with agendas that range from medicine to the environment. The recent polarization of American politics and society, the denigration of expertise as elitist, and the media's tendency to provide legitimizing, “both sides” coverage of issues, even when undeserved, seem only to have exacerbated this problem.

Opioids provide an interesting example where sloppy scholarship, dishonest marketing, the evolving practice of medicine, the co‐opting of scientific and medical leadership, and greed combined to create an addiction epidemic that has roiled the country for more than two decades. It all began in 1980 with a one‐paragraph letter by Jane Porter and Hershel Jick in the New England Journal of Medicine that made a simple observation: based on hospital records, narcotic addiction was rare in patients with no history of addiction. This was not a formal study, and there was no information about the narcotics being used or their dosage, frequency, or duration. 35 Over time other researchers cited this letter without context or qualification and, in some cases, later apologized for having never read it. An important missing caveat was that Porter and Jick's observation was based on hospitalized patients, not outpatients being prescribed drugs for self‐administration. 36

Unfortunately, this letter ended up serving two masters: a drug industry energized by Madison Avenue‐style marketing and a medical community in the midst of a changing paradigm, namely that pain was being undertreated and should be viewed as a “fifth vital sign”. 36 By the mid‐1990s, disreputable physicians, many of whom had been sanctioned, began opening pill mills across Appalachia. At the same time, Purdue Pharma developed OxyContin as a time‐release drug and promoted it as a less‐additive painkiller in spite of having provided no supporting data to the FDA. They falsely claimed that the narcotic was harder to extract (and thus abuse) than other painkillers when their own studies indicated that 68 percent of the oxycodone could be extracted when crushed and liquified. Phony graphs were also used in marketing to give the impression that the plasma levels of oxycodone were steady when, in fact, they spiked in the users’ blood and then crashed. Purdue Pharma ultimately was called to account, reminiscent of Big Tobacco, when three executives pled guilty to misdemeanor false branding and paid a $634M fine. 36 , 37

If manipulated and fraudulent science were not enough, the opioid industry also followed the Big Tobacco playbook by cultivating physicians, institutions, and organizations willing to support pharma's message that opioids were safe and non‐addictive. As alleged in a lawsuit filed by the Massachusetts Attorney General in 2019, “Purdue hired the most prolific opioid prescribers in Massachusetts as spokesmen to promote its drugs to other doctors. Purdue funded the Massachusetts General Hospital Purdue Pharma Pain Program and an entire degree program at Tufts University to influence Massachusetts doctors to use its drugs.” 38 Tufts even promoted a Purdue Pharma employee to Adjunct Associate Professor in 2011. 39

Leading advocacy groups and professional societies also played a role by lobbying on behalf of the opioid industry's marketing and prescribing practices while accepting their donations. In 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued guidelines for primary care providers who prescribe narcotics for non‐cancer chronic pain. Those guidelines encouraged the preferential use of non‐opioid pharmacologic agents, highlighted the risks of addiction, and identified the drugs most likely to cause harm and the patients most at risk. 40 The drug industry did not approve. According to a report from the U.S. Senate's Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC), The American Pain Society, the U.S. Pain Foundation, the Academy of Integrative Pain Management, and the American Academy of Pain Management accepted more than $6M from narcotics manufacturers from 2012‐2017. 41 Altogether the report identifies more than a dozen groups receiving almost $9 M from five manufacturers. What did all this largess buy the industry? In part, active opposition to the development and issuance of the CDC guidelines by a majority of the groups identified in the HSGAC report. According to the report: “Many of the groups discussed in this report have amplified or issued messages that reinforce industry efforts to promote opioid prescription and use, including guidelines and policies minimizing the risk of addiction and promoting opioids for chronic pain”. 41

The internet, celebrity culture, and targeted marketing through social media such as Facebook make it easier to spread anti‐science messages to receptive groups than in decades past. Andrew Wakefield's reputation in the scientific community may be in shambles thanks to his fraudulent research claiming a link between autism and the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine, but his public profile remains high and he is an unfairly maligned hero to the anti‐vaxx community. 42 The TV personality Jenny McCarthy runs a non‐profit called Generation Rescue that continues to provide a forum for Wakefield's dishonest claims, 43 which have caused real harm in the form of depressed vaccination rates in Great Britain and the United States. 44 What was Wakefield's motivation? The now‐familiar motivator of greed, in this case an elaborate scheme to get rich from lawsuits generated by vaccine fears. 45

Today there are also organizations, largely on the political right, that exist solely or in part to cast doubt on science that does not comport with their ideology of opposition to regulation. Not surprisingly this opposition often provides a side benefit: bolstering the economics of specific industries. Some of these organizations are respected think tanks with political philosophies strongly favoring free enterprise, such as the American Enterprise Institute and the Hoover Institution, which sometimes provide a forum for climate‐change skeptics. 46 , 47 Others identify themselves as grassroots organizations while functioning primarily as lobbying groups for fossil fuel and other industries, such as the Koch‐funded Americans for Prosperity.

The non‐profit Association of American Physicians and Surgeons is a particularly interesting example. Through its publishing arm, the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, this trade association provides a forum for commentary about free‐market medicine (often not evidence‐based), polemics against regulation in medicine, and sometimes fringe science that has nothing to do with medicine but does align with its overall anti‐regulation ideology. Articles have cast doubt, for example, on the existence of climate change as a global threat, or trumpeted its benefits. 48 , 49 Others have questioned HIV as the cause of AIDS 50 and offered a sympathetic airing of anti‐vaxxers’ fringe view that autism is linked to vaccines, despite evidence to the contrary, even providing a forum for the discredited Andrew Wakefield. 51 , 52 , 53

5. CONCLUSION

Intentional perversion of science in the service of ideology makes clear the validity of the following assertion by neuroscientist and philosopher Sam Harris:

“The core of science is not controlled experiment or mathematical modeling; it is intellectual honesty. It is time we acknowledge a basic feature of human discourse: when considering the truth of a proposition, one is either engaged in an honest appraisal of the evidence and logical arguments, or one isn't”. 54

Intellectual honesty is the heart of all scholarship, irrespective of the discipline, and the translation of scholarship for the public should honor it, not debase it in the interest of ideology or greed. A public that has low scientific literacy and numeracy now faces a growing wave of misinformation, and that public will struggle to separate valid science from nonsense. 4 , 5 , 6 These trends bode ill for public awareness and acceptance of legitimate science and serve as an injunction for individual scientists and the scientific community to push back aggressively against all attempts to misrepresent the methods and results of sound research.

Strategies to counter the abuse of science vary and depend on the nature and context of the abuse in question. Some strategies may be specific and highly targeted, while others may be more far‐reaching. For example, one of us (JDM) threatened legal action against his children's public‐ school district if a creationist candidate for the board of education made good on his promise to mandate the teaching of creationism in the biology curriculum. On a broader scale, an organization both of us have worked for, the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study, assisted in a number of evolution/creationism court cases whose decisions had implications at state and national levels.

Whatever the context, prevention of and opposition to the abuse of science begin with the integrity of individual scientists and the scientific community at large, as invoked by Thomas Huxley and Sam Harris. Scientists should model that integrity in their work and should discuss it explicitly with their trainees—the next generation of scientists. Perhaps it is time as well to consider a complete ban on industry‐funded research for individual scientists working in academia and other non‐industry settings to remove incentives for bias in reporting of results and to help ensure the public that research agendas are not determined by corporate interests. Science education for the general public—formal and informal—should emphasize the expectation of intellectual honesty in its treatment of the nature and methods of science. It serves little purpose to impress upon students the steps in “the scientific method” if those steps do not reflect a commitment to ethical conduct.

McInerney JD, Dougherty MJ. Abusing science . FASEB BioAdvances . 2020; 2 :587–595. 10.1096/fba.2020-00054 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Essay on Uses and Abuses of Science.

Introduction:

In the primitive age, man was living like a savage. he did not know how to wear a cloth. He did not know how to make fire and cook his food. He did not know how to make a hut or a house.

Image Source: azed.gov/wp-content/uploads/IMAGES/Science.jpg

He did not know how to speak. He did not know how to read and write. But gradually by the use of science he developed a great civilization.

Use of science brought about a great change:

At the dawn of civilization man developed a scientific outlook. With the help of science he made observation and experiment, though they were crude at first. he discovered the relationship between a cause and its effect. He discovered some secrets of nature. He came to know the use of fire. With the help of it, he cooked his meal and scared the wild animals. Then he came to know sowing and planting. He discovered the conditions for seeds to sprout. He discovered the process for tending plants. He grew crops and stored the surplus. He came from cave to cottage and from cottage to pucca house. He knew the tending of useful animals and put them to his service. He made many works of invention. He grew cotton were due to proper uses of science.

Modern use of science:

Uses of science are now inseparable even from out day-to-day life. With the help of science and technology we have made pin to space-craft. We have made highly complicated machines for large-scale productions. We have conquered over time and distance. We are conquering disease and sickness. Radio and telecommunications, X-Ray and electricity, rotary and railways are all the works of science. So at present the uses of science are many and varied.

Abuses of science:

Modern man has begun to abuse his scientific knowledge, invention of atom bomb is the burning example of it. Abuse of science will lead to destruction of mankind.

Conclusion:

Abuse of science can be checked by creating a strong public opinion all over the world. Leaders of peace should keep alert and active to do the needful in this respect.

Note: This article/essay is written in easy words for School Students Only.

Essay on Science in Peace and War

Privacy Overview

Cookie	Duration	Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional	11 months	The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy	11 months	The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.

Paragraph on Uses and abuses of Science

Uses and abuses of Science

First journey of science: The first scientist of the world was a prehistoric man. He used his brains to invent the simplest device to make his life less painful. Science started its humble journey from that day.

Science grew richer and richer and it has reached its golden age today. It has revolutionized man’s life so thoroughly that we like to cal this age the age of science. It is science that tells a modern man how to live.

Science is a mixed blessing. Though the basket of gifts of sciences is full to the brain, science has not been an unmixed blessing to man. If used property, science is helpful for us. If abused, science may become a threat to humanity.

Science has modernized our homes. Pressure cooker, gas ovens, washing machine, refrigerator have changed the look of our kitchen.
Trains, buses, planes, motor cars, bicycles have made our journey quicker and more comfortable.
The radio, Television (TV) adds to our knowledge and pleasure.
Telephones, mobile-phones are important communication devices.
Electric light, fan, air-conditioners, cooler,etc. make our life comfortable.
Science has given us life saving drugs and medical facilities.
Science has taught us how to use the gifts of nature.

Abuses of science: Man uses science for the bane of his fellow beings too.

The industrial and vehicular pollution is a major harmful effects of the abusive usage of science.
Man has used science to make deadly weapons.
Two Great World wars killed a great number of people and destroyed big cities.
Nuclear bombs can put the entire cities out of existence. The nuclear bomb, explosives, the hydrogen bomb, poisonous gas, missiles, chemical warfare, etc. are extremely destructive application of science.
Man has become over-dependent on scientific equipment and devices.
Children and adults wastes immense time and energy watching television and surfing the internet.

Conclusion: On one hand, science has given us the physical comfort. But, on the other hand, it has caused many problems for mankind. People have begun to fight against the misuse of science.

Short Paragraph on Importance of Trees

Short Paragraph on Chalukya Kingdom

Social Stratification: 12 Major Characteristics of Social Stratification

Remembering Dr. Vikram Sarabhai: A Visionary Pioneer of India’s Space Journey

Exploring the Advantages and Disadvantages of Tourism

Emperor Akbar: Architect of Harmony and Conquest

Adolf Hitler: A Dark Journey Through History

The promise in India’s National Quantum Mission

Tracking SDG progress the Bhopal way

India as a Quad-led biomanufacturing hub

Bare New World

What is financial independence and how can you achieve it?

Comments are closed.

Welcome, Login to your account.

Recover your password.

A password will be e-mailed to you.

Donate to Charities
Privacy Policy

eEnglishGrammar.com

Uses and abuses of science.

If you have come this far, it means that you liked what you are reading. Why not reach little more and connect with me directly on Facebook or Twitter . I would love to hear your thoughts and opinions on my articles directly.

Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet

Students are often asked to write an essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet

The uses of internet.

The internet is a powerful tool that has revolutionized our world. It provides us with information, communication, and entertainment. We can research any topic, connect with friends, and enjoy movies or games.

The Abuses of Internet

However, the internet can also be misused. Cyberbullying, online scams, and the spread of false information are common problems. Furthermore, excessive internet use can lead to addiction, affecting our health and social life.

In conclusion, while the internet offers numerous benefits, it’s crucial to use it responsibly to avoid its potential pitfalls.

Also check:

250 Words Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet

Introduction.

The internet, a revolutionary invention of the 20th century, has transformed our lives in profound ways. It has become an indispensable tool in various sectors, including education, business, communication, and entertainment. However, like any tool, it can be used both for constructive and destructive purposes.

Uses of Internet

The internet has democratized access to information, breaking down geographical barriers. It has made education more accessible, with countless resources and online learning platforms available at our fingertips. It has also revolutionized communication, enabling instant interaction across the globe. The internet has made business operations more efficient, from online banking to e-commerce. It has also provided a platform for creative expression and entertainment, with platforms like YouTube and Spotify.

Abuses of Internet

However, the internet’s misuse is a growing concern. Cyberbullying, identity theft, and online harassment are rampant, causing psychological harm to individuals. The internet has also facilitated the spread of misinformation and fake news, leading to societal discord and distrust. Additionally, it has given rise to internet addiction, affecting individuals’ mental health and productivity. The proliferation of explicit content is another issue, impacting the moral fabric of society.

In conclusion, while the internet has myriad benefits, its misuse can lead to serious consequences. It is crucial to use this tool responsibly, promoting digital literacy and ethical online behavior. As we stride further into the digital age, we must strike a balance between leveraging the internet’s potential and mitigating its pitfalls.

500 Words Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet

The advent of the internet has revolutionized the world, bringing about profound changes in the way we live, learn, and work. It has become an integral part of our lives, providing us with a plethora of information and services at our fingertips. However, like any other invention, the internet also has its share of uses and abuses. This essay explores the beneficial aspects of the internet and its potential pitfalls.

Uses of the Internet

The internet’s most significant advantage is its ability to connect people globally. It has made communication faster, cheaper, and more efficient, breaking down geographical barriers. Through email, social media, video conferencing, and instant messaging, we can interact with anyone, anywhere, at any time.

Moreover, the internet has transformed the business landscape. E-commerce has opened up new markets, enabling businesses to reach customers globally. It has also made financial transactions more straightforward and faster through online banking and digital payments.

Abuses of the Internet

Despite its advantages, the internet is not without its downsides. One of the most prevalent abuses is cybercrime. This encompasses a wide range of malicious activities, from identity theft and fraud to cyberstalking and cyberbullying. The anonymity that the internet provides can be exploited by unscrupulous individuals to harm others.

Additionally, the internet can be a source of addiction. Excessive use of social media, online gaming, or other digital activities can lead to internet addiction, negatively impacting mental health and personal relationships.

In conclusion, the internet is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it offers immense benefits, facilitating communication, education, and business. On the other hand, it can be a tool for harm, enabling cybercrime, the spread of misinformation, and addiction. As users, it is incumbent upon us to use the internet responsibly. We must be vigilant in protecting ourselves from its potential abuses while harnessing its vast potential for our benefit. As the internet continues to evolve, so too must our understanding and regulation of its use and abuse.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Happy studying!

Uses and Abuses of Modern Science

Save to my list

Remove from my list

Uses and Abuses of Modern Science. (2016, Oct 10). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/uses-and-abuses-of-modern-science-essay

"Uses and Abuses of Modern Science." StudyMoose , 10 Oct 2016, https://studymoose.com/uses-and-abuses-of-modern-science-essay

StudyMoose. (2016). Uses and Abuses of Modern Science . [Online]. Available at: https://studymoose.com/uses-and-abuses-of-modern-science-essay [Accessed: 25 Jul. 2024]

"Uses and Abuses of Modern Science." StudyMoose, Oct 10, 2016. Accessed July 25, 2024. https://studymoose.com/uses-and-abuses-of-modern-science-essay

"Uses and Abuses of Modern Science," StudyMoose , 10-Oct-2016. [Online]. Available: https://studymoose.com/uses-and-abuses-of-modern-science-essay. [Accessed: 25-Jul-2024]

StudyMoose. (2016). Uses and Abuses of Modern Science . [Online]. Available at: https://studymoose.com/uses-and-abuses-of-modern-science-essay [Accessed: 25-Jul-2024]

Uses and Abuses of Internet Pages: 2 (446 words)
Uses and Abuses of Satellite TV Channels Pages: 2 (471 words)
Shrek: A Commentary of Abuses in Society Pages: 4 (1170 words)
Uses Of Statistics In Modern Science Researches Pages: 6 (1714 words)
Antenna Technology And Uses Computer Science Essay Pages: 10 (2890 words)
Computer Science, Data Science And Real Science Pages: 2 (594 words)
Marijuana and Cannabis: Effects, Uses and Legalization Pages: 2 (578 words)
USES AND GRATIFICATION OF WHATSAPP AMONG STUDENT SEMESTER 6 ALPHA COLLEGE OF Pages: 7 (1897 words)
Chronological Order & Its Uses in Great Expectations and Huckleberry Finn Pages: 7 (1978 words)
Different Types of Equipment and Their Uses Pages: 1 (240 words)

👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!

Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.

Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet

The advent of the internet has ushered in an era of unprecedented connectivity, transforming the way we live, work, and communicate. As a powerful tool that shapes various facets of our daily lives, the internet presents a duality – a spectrum of uses and potential abuses. This essay explores the multifaceted nature of the internet, delving into its constructive applications and the challenges it poses when misused.

Quick Overview:

Information Access: One of the primary uses of the internet is as a vast repository of information. It serves as a knowledge hub, providing access to a plethora of educational resources, news articles, and research materials, democratizing information on a global scale.
Communication and Connectivity: The internet has revolutionized communication, facilitating instant connectivity across the globe. Social media platforms, email, and messaging apps enable seamless interaction, fostering relationships and bridging geographical gaps.
Economic Opportunities: In the digital age, the internet has become a catalyst for economic growth. E-commerce, freelancing, and online marketplaces create opportunities for entrepreneurship and employment, empowering individuals to showcase their skills and products to a global audience.
Entertainment and Recreation: Streaming services, online gaming, and virtual entertainment have become integral parts of internet use. The platform offers a plethora of options for leisure and recreation, providing a diverse range of content to cater to individual preferences.
Cybersecurity Concerns: The internet’s vast reach also brings forth challenges, particularly in the realm of cybersecurity. Issues such as hacking, identity theft, and cyberbullying highlight the darker side of internet usage, underscoring the need for robust digital security measures.

Conclusion: In conclusion, the internet stands as a double-edged sword, offering immense possibilities for positive transformation while simultaneously harboring potential pitfalls. Its uses, ranging from information dissemination to economic empowerment, demonstrate the profound impact it has on our lives. However, as we navigate this digital landscape, it becomes imperative to address the abuses that stem from its misuse.

The constructive uses of the internet underscore its role as a facilitator of progress, knowledge, and global connectivity. Yet, the challenges posed by cyber threats, online harassment, and the dissemination of misinformation necessitate a collective effort to create a safer and more responsible digital environment.

As individuals, we bear the responsibility of leveraging the internet’s potential for good, promoting ethical practices, and safeguarding against its potential abuses. Initiatives for digital literacy, cybersecurity education, and responsible internet usage play pivotal roles in fostering a healthier online ecosystem.

In this dynamic interplay between uses and abuses, society finds itself at a crossroads. The evolution of the internet will continue to shape our future, and how we navigate this digital landscape will determine the legacy we leave for generations to come. With thoughtful consideration, ethical practices, and a commitment to digital well-being, we can harness the positive potential of the internet while mitigating its darker aspects, ensuring a harmonious coexistence in the digital age.

Rahul Kumar is a passionate educator, writer, and subject matter expert in the field of education and professional development. As an author on CoursesXpert, Rahul Kumar’s articles cover a wide range of topics, from various courses, educational and career guidance.

How To Write An Argumentative Essay On Political Science?

Creative Essay Writing Techniques: How To Write a Creative Essay

10 Lines on My Mother in English

Essay on Science is a Blessing or Curse with Quotations for Students

English essay science, a curse or blessing with quotations for matric, f.a, fsc and b.a.

Science is a Blessing or Curse Essay is here on IlmiHub.com . This is an important essay for those outstanding students who are looking for the material for examinations. However, other people can also learn it for general knowledge and job tests. Science, a Curse or Blessing Essay will discuss the uses and abuses of science .

Science is a Blessing or Curse Essay with Quotes for Class 10, Class 12 (2nd Year) and Graduation Examination

“Equipped with his five senses, man explores the universe around him and calls the adventure Science.” (Edwin Powell Hubble)

Man is curious by nature. He wishes to uncover the mysterious things. So he has concentrated on various issues and explored the several hidden truths. Science has helped him in his efforts to do so. As far as the question of science is a blessing or curse is concerned, it is obvious that everything has its uses and abuses. Science can be used both as a curse or a blessing. It totally depends on the human beings how they prefer to use it. The usage of these gifts of science for a positive aim will surely give sweet results but its negative usage will result in disasters. So it would be difficult to declare science as a curse or a blessing.

Undoubtedly, science has helped mankind achieve fantastic mental growth. Science has provided humans a vision to explore the secrets of nature. We have already made the world “a small place to live” and have gone even out of our own planet. We are exploring the depth of the earth. We have been able to increase the longevity, reduced the decaying effect of nature on the human body.

“A man of science is just a student of nature and derives his inspiration from science” (C.V. Romanas)

With the help of medical science, man has achieved tremendous success. Scientists are now finding the cure for fatal diseases by making extraordinary drugs and medicines. There was a time when diseases such as malaria, influenza and tuberculosis were considered to be incurable. But now even some forms of cancer are curable. All this would not have been possible if medical science had not progressed.

Science has also benefitted us in the production and preservation of foods. The construction of our homes and the improvement in communication and transportation. It is through the help of science that man has become more rational and realistic. It would be unthankful on our part if we don’t identify how vast benefits modern technology has offered us.

But this is one side of the picture. Some people are of the view that science is a chief cause of human sufferings. They have reasons to say that science and its applications are not, on the whole, good for mankind. Industrialism brought new troubles. It proved harmful to cottage industry; hence it caused unemployment. It introduced new machines and supported the cruelty of the capitalists over the labourers. The rich gained much by exploiting the poor workers. The use of machinery to the service of man resulted in more evils.

“The machine does not isolate man from the great problems of nature but plunges him more deeply into them.” (Antoine de Saint)

How can we forget the day of August 6, I945 when the first atomic bomb was dropped on the Japanese city of Hiroshima by the US. Military? Three days later, the United States, dropped a second atom bomb on the city of Nagasaki bringing World War ll to an end. In total, more than 140,000 people were estimated to be killed.

In the social field, the use of science has also produced bad results. The use of machinery has given a new speed to man’s life and activity. He has become materialistic. The moral values of life are now considered things of the past. The system of joint family has shattered. Art and literature have been badly affected by the impact of mechanization. Medicines and other surgical aids are available to the people but these have not promoted a better standard of health. On the other hand, millions of dollars are being spent on the inventions of dangerous war weapons. In the modern world, corruption and lust are also gifts of science. Man’s life is becoming more and more artificial.

“If there is technological advance without social advance, there is, almost automatically, an increase in human misery, in impoverishment.” (Michael Harrington)

From the above discussion on the merits and demerits of science . we can conclude that science is actually neither a blessing nor a curse. It is what man makes of it. Science can be the greatest of the blessings or the worst of the curses. In fact, science is not to be blamed but the man who uses it badly. Science has neither urged man to invent destructive weapons nor forced him to be materialistic selfish and greedy. If we don’t use it for constructive purposes it is obviously not the fault of science but ours. Science is only a servant and it depends on us how we get services from it. Science surely offers innumerable benefits to humankind but we need to use it sensibly and wisely.

“Why does this magnificent applied science, which saves work and makes life easier bring us so little happiness? The simple answer runs: Because we have not yet learned to make sensible use of it.” (Albert Einstein)

Science, an Enemy of Man Essay is also an essay like science is a blessing or curse essay .

More In English Essays

Essay Writing 101: The Basics That Every Writer Should Know

Students and Social Service Essay with Quotations

load Shedding Essay, Essay on Load Shedding in Pakistan, Energy Crisis Essay

Load Shedding in Pakistan Essay – 1200 Words

Access over 35 million academic & study documents

Essay:uses and abuses of science.

24/7 Study Help

Stuck on a study question? Our verified tutors can answer all questions, from basic math to advanced rocket science !

Ongoing Conversations

Access over 35 million study documents through the notebank

Get on-demand Q&A study help from verified tutors

Read 1000s of rich book guides covering popular titles

Already have an account? Login

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Uses And Abuses Of Science Essay | Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science for Students and Children in English

July 17, 2024

ChatGPT Isn’t ‘Hallucinating’—It’s Bullshitting!

It’s important that we use accurate terminology when discussing how AI chatbots make up information

By Joe Slater , James Humphries & Michael Townsen Hicks

Alt Robot with bullhorn and fingers crossed behind back

Malte Mueller/Getty Images

Right now artificial intelligence is everywhere. When you write a document, you’ll probably be asked whether you need your “AI assistant.” Open a PDF and you might be asked whether you want an AI to provide you with a summary. But if you have used ChatGPT or similar programs, you’re probably familiar with a certain problem— it makes stuff up , causing people to view things it says with suspicion.

It has become common to describe these errors as “ hallucinations .” But talking about ChatGPT this way is misleading and potentially damaging. Instead call it bullshit.

We don’t say this lightly. Among philosophers, “bullshit” has a specialist meaning , one popularized by the late American philosopher Harry Frankfurt . When someone bullshits, they’re not telling the truth, but they’re also not really lying. What characterizes the bullshitter, Frankfurt said, is that they just don’t care whether what they say is true. ChatGPT and its peers cannot care, and they are instead, in a technical sense, bullshit machines.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

We can easily see why this is true and why it matters. Last year, for example, one lawyer found himself in hot water when he used ChatGPT in his research while writing a legal brief . Unfortunately, ChatGPT had included fictitious case citations. The cases it cited simply did not exist.

This isn’t rare or anomalous . To understand why, it’s worth thinking a bit about how these programs work . OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini chatbot and Meta’s Llama all work in structurally similar ways. At their core is an LLM—a large language model. These models all make predictions about language. Given some input, ChatGPT will make some prediction about what should come next or what is an appropriate response. It does so through an analysis of enormous amounts of text (its “training data”). In ChatGPT’s case, the initial training data included billions of pages of text from the Internet.

From those training data, the LLM predicts, from some text fragment or prompt, what should come next. It will arrive at a list of the most likely words (technically, linguistic tokens ) to come next, then select one of the leading candidates. Allowing for it not to choose the most likely word each time allows for more creative (and more human-sounding) language. The parameter that sets how much deviation is permitted is known as the “temperature.” Later in the process, human trainers refine predictions by judging whether the outputs constitute sensible speech. Extra restrictions may also be placed on the program to avoid problems (such as ChatGPT saying racist things ), but this token-by-token prediction is the idea that underlies all of this technology.

Now, we can see from this description that nothing about the modeling ensures that the outputs accurately depict anything in the world. There is not much reason to think that the outputs are connected to any sort of internal representation at all. A well-trained chatbot will produce humanlike text, but nothing about the process checks that the text is true, which is why we strongly doubt an LLM really understands what it says.

So sometimes ChatGPT says false things. In recent years, as we have been becoming accustomed to AI, people have started to refer to these falsehoods as “ AI hallucinations .” While this language is metaphorical, we think it’s not a good metaphor.

Consider Shakespeare’s paradigmatic hallucination in which Macbeth sees a dagger floating toward him. What’s going on here? Macbeth is trying to use his perceptual capacities in his normal way, but something has gone wrong. And his perceptual capacities are almost always reliable—he doesn’t usually see daggers randomly floating about! Normally his vision is useful in representing the world, and it is good at this because of its connection to the world.

Now think about ChatGPT. Whenever it says anything, it is simply trying to produce humanlike text. The goal is simply to make something that sounds good. This is never directly tied to the world. When it goes wrong, it isn’t because it hasn’t succeeded in representing the world this time; it never tries to represent the world! Calling its falsehoods “hallucinations” doesn’t capture this feature.

Instead we suggest, in a June report in Ethics and Information Technology , that a better term is “bullshit.” As mentioned, a bullshitter just doesn’t care whether what they say is true.

So if we do regard ChatGPT as engaging in a conversation with us—though even this might be a bit of a pretense —then it seems to fit the bill. As much as it intends to do anything, it intends to produce convincing humanlike text. It isn’t trying to say things about the world. It’s just bullshitting. And crucially, it’s bullshitting even when it says true things!

Why does this matter? Isn’t “hallucination” just a nice metaphor here? Does it really matter if it’s not apt? We think it does matter for at least three reasons:

First, the terminology we use affects public understanding of technology, which is important in itself. If we use misleading terms, people are more likely to misconstrue how the technology works. We think this in itself is a bad thing.

Second, how we describe technology affects our relationship with that technology and how we think about it. And this can be harmful. Consider people who have been lulled into a false of security by “self-driving” cars . We worry that talking of AI “hallucinating”—a term usually used for human psychology—risks anthropomorphizing the chatbots. The ELIZA effect (named after a chatbot from the 1960s) occurs when people attribute human features to computer programs. We saw this in extremis in the case of the Google employee who came to believe that one of the company’s chatbots was sentient . Describing ChatGPT as a bullshit machine (even if it’s a very impressive one) helps mitigate this risk.

Third, if we attribute agency to the programs, this may shift blame away from those using ChatGPT, or its programmers, when things go wrong. If, as appears to be the case, this kind of technology will increasingly be used in important matters such as health care , it is crucial that we know who is responsible when things go wrong.

So next time you see someone describing an AI making something up as a “hallucination,” call bullshit!

This is an opinion and analysis article, and the views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
24 July 2024

Science must protect thinking time in a world of instant communication

You have full access to this article via your institution.

A man working at a computer in an office at night and looking at a smartphone

Digital devices are proliferating but don’t always have the positive effect on productivity researchers might hope. Credit: Getty

Video calls. Instant messaging. Voice calls. E-mails. Social media. Smartphones. Tablets. Laptops. Desktops. More digital devices equals less time to concentrate and to think. The negative effects of this on researchers are tackled by computer scientist Cal Newport in his latest book, Slow Productivity 1 .

The book’s title challenges the idea, common to many workplaces, that productivity must always increase. A study has shown that science is becoming less disruptive , even though there are now more papers being published and grants awarded than ever before 2 . Newport, who studies technology in the workplace at Georgetown University in Washington DC, says that researchers and other knowledge workers need to slow down and spend more time thinking, to focus on maintaining and improving quality in their work.

Newport does the research community a service by shining a spotlight on an overburdened workforce. Institutions should already be accessing the expertise that exists within their walls in the search for answers, but are not doing so. Newer communications technologies have enormous benefits, including speeding up research, as was necessary during the COVID-19 pandemic. But they are also squeezing out thinking time. Newport’s book reminds us that there are researchers who will know how to help.

Stop, drop and think

Thinking time — the time needed to concentrate without interruptions has always been central to scholarly work. It is essential to designing experiments, compiling data, assessing results, reviewing literature and, of course, writing. Yet, thinking time is often undervalued; it is rarely, if ever, quantified in employment practices.

Is science really getting less disruptive — and does it matter if it is?

One way to think about the practice of juggling research with e-mail and instant messaging is to visualize someone working next to a physical letterbox. Imagine opening and reading every letter as soon as it arrives, and starting to compose a reply, even as more letters drop through the box — all the while trying to do your main job. Researchers say that their to-do lists tend to lengthen, in part because colleagues can contact them instantly, often for good reasons. Researchers also often have to choose what to prioritize, which can cause them to feel overwhelmed.

Newport gives suggestions on reclaiming thinking time, include limiting the number of items on to-do lists and project teams setting aside time to complete tasks that require all members, thus avoiding individual members sending e-mails to each other. For institutions, Newport recommends a transparent workload management system — a way for managers to see everything that a colleague is expected to do — and then to adjust the workload if there are more tasks than there is available time.

Undoubtedly good advice, this might be easier to implement in industrial settings than in academic ones. In many academic research laboratories, researchers report to a single principal investigator, with little management structure. This is partly because it is hard to justify to academic funders the budget for paying for management and administration roles.

Is science’s dominant funding model broken?

But Felicity Mellor, a science-communication researcher at Imperial College London, is sceptical about giving managers a role in thinking time. In many cases, researchers are already feeling the weight of their institution’s monitoring and evaluation systems. Mellor argues that including yet another box in an evaluation form might not go down well. She also thinks that institutions will not accept this. “Can you imagine the response if a scientist filled out a time sheet where it says ‘eight hours spent thinking’?” Ultimately, she says, creating a more supportive research culture needs a much more fundamental change. That suggests an even more radical rethink of the current funding model for academic research, as we wrote last month (see Nature 630 , 793; 2024 ), along with changes to other aspects of academic science.

Quality check

Newport’s thesis raises a much more fundamental question: what is the impact of lost concentration time on science — not just on the structure and process of science, but also on the content and quality of research?

In 2014, Mellor co-led a research project, funded by the UK Arts and Humanities Research Council, called The Silences of Science, published as a book two years later 3 . Researchers discussed this question, and others in a series of workshops, but the work did not continue after the grant expired. Such explorations need to be revived, but they also need to incorporate the impact of artificial-intelligence technologies. These tools are being implemented at pace around the world to automate many routine administrative tasks. Researchers need to evaluate whether such tools can free up more thinking time for researchers; or whether they could have the opposite effect.

Communications technologies are sure to evolve further and to continue distracting researchers from their work. More studies investigating the effect of these technologies on science are needed urgently, as are studies on how thinking time can be protected in a world of instant communication. This knowledge will help researchers and institutional leaders to make better decisions about the technologies’ deployment — and, hopefully, allow researchers to carve out that all-important space and time to think.

Nature 631 , 709 (2024)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-02381-x

Newport, C. Slow Productivity: The Lost Art of Accomplishment Without Burnout (Portfolio, 2024).

Google Scholar

Park. M et al. Nature 613 , 138–144 (2023).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Mellor, F. & Webster, S. The Silences of Science: Gaps and Pauses in the Communication of Science (Routledge, 2016).

Download references

Reprints and permissions

Research management

Why you should perform a premortem on your research

Career Column 24 JUL 24

So you got a null result. Will anyone publish it?

News Feature 24 JUL 24

Hungarian researchers struggle amid EU funding ban

Correspondence 23 JUL 24

India budget: Modi bets big on nuclear energy and space

News 25 JUL 24

Why US–China relations are too important to be left to politicians

Comment 23 JUL 24

A stroke derailed my academic career. Now I’m getting back on track

Career Column 23 JUL 24

I’ve built a career without a big golden grant. Here’s how

Career Column 22 JUL 24

Postdoctoral Research Scientist

Computational Postdoctoral Research Scientist in Neurodegenerative Disease

New York City, New York (US)

Columbia University Department of Pathology

Associate or Senior Editor (Chemical Engineering), Nature Sustainability

Associate or Senior Editor (Chemical engineering), Nature Sustainability Locations: New York, Philadelphia, Berlin, or Heidelberg Closing date: Aug...

Springer Nature Ltd

Postdoctoral Research Scientist - Mouse Model

The Stavros Niarchos Foundation Center for Precision Psychiatry & Mental Health is seeking a Postdoctoral Research Scientist for the Mouse Model.

Columbia University Irving Medical Center / Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons

Postdoctoral Research Scientist - IPSC Program

The Stavros Niarchos Foundation Center for Precision Psychiatry & Mental Health is seeking a Postdoctoral Research Scientist - IPSC Program.

Postdoctoral Research Scientist - Xenotransplantation

The Stavros Niarchos Foundation Center for Precision Psychiatry & Mental Health is seeking a Postdoctoral Research Scientist -Xentotransplantation.

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

CBSE Library

Uses And Abuses Of Science Essay | Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science for Students and Children in English

You can also find more Essay Writing articles on events, persons, sports, technology and many more.

Long Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science 500+ Words for Kids and Students in English

Short Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science 300 Words for Kids and Students in English

Educators wonder how to teach the writings of Alice Munro in wake of daughter’s revelations

FILE - Canadian author Alice Munro is photographed during an interview in Victoria, B.C. Tuesday, Dec.10, 2013. (Chad Hipolito/The Canadian Press via AP, File)

Copy Link copied

NEW YORK (AP) — For decades, Robert Lecker has read, taught and written about Alice Munro, the Nobel laureate from Canada renowned for her short stories. A professor of English at McGill University in Montreal, and author of numerous critical studies of Canadian fiction, he has thought of Munro as the “jewel” in the crown of her country’s literature and source of some of the richest material for classroom discussion.

But since learning that Munro declined to leave her husband after he had sexually assaulted and harassed her daughter, Lecker now wonders how to teach her work, or if he should even try.

“I had decided to teach a graduate course on Munro in the winter of 2025,” Lecker says. “Now I have serious questions whether I feel ethically capable of offering that course.”

Andrea Robin Skinner, daughter of Munro and James Munro, wrote in the Toronto Star earlier this month that she had been assaulted at age 9 by Munro’s second husband, Gerard Fremlin. She alleged that he continued to harass and abuse her for the next few years, losing interest when she reached her teens. In her 20s, she told her mother about Fremlin’s abuse. But Munro, after briefly leaving Fremlin, returned and remained with him until his death in 2013. She would explain to Skinner that she “loved him too much” to remain apart.

When Munro died in May at age 92, she was celebrated worldwide for narratives which documented rare insight into her characters’ secrets, motivations, passions and cruelties, especially those of girls and women. Admirers cited her not just as a literary inspiration, but as a kind of moral guide, sometimes described as “Saint Alice.” A New York Times essay that ran shortly after her death, by Canadian author Sheila Heti, was titled “I Don’t Write Like Alice Munro, But I Want to Live Like Her.”

“No one knows the compromises another makes, especially when that person is as private as she was and transforms her trials into fiction,” Heti wrote. “Yet whatever the truth of her daily existence, she still shines as a symbol of artistic purity.”

Educators in Canada and beyond are now rethinking her life and work. At Western University in London, Ontario, Munro’s alma mater, the school has posted a statement on its website saying that it was “taking time to carefully consider the impact” of the revelations. Since 2018, Western University has offered an Alice Munro Chair in Creativity, with a mission to “Lead the creative culture of the Faculty of Arts and Humanities, serving as a mentor and a model.” That chair, held for the past academic year by Heti, will be left unfilled as “we carefully consider Munro’s legacy and her ties to Western,” according to the school.

Requests with Heti’s agent and publicists for comment were not immediately answered.

For the fall semester at Harvard University, authors and faculty members Laura van den Berg and Neel Mukherjee will be co-teaching “Reading for Fiction Writers,” a review of literary works ranging from the science fiction of Octavia Butler to the “realist” fiction of Munro. Van den Berg, a prize-winning writer whose books include the story collection “The Isle of Youth” and the novel “State of Paradise,” says that Munro’s failure to support Skinner has forced her to rethink her approach to the class.

“I’ll never read Munro the same away again, and won’t be teaching her the same way,” she says. “To me, what was so painful about what Andrea Skinner has been through is the silence. And feeling that she could break her silence after her mother was gone. To me, to just stand in front a group of students and read the lecture I had originally prepared would feel like a second silencing.”

A former student of Lecker’s, Kellie Elrick, says she is still figuring out how Munro should be taught and how to think of her work. Munro’s stories have enriched her life, she says, and she doesn’t regret reading them. Elrick, entering her fourth year at McGill, sees parallel narratives, “difficult to reconcile,” of “Munro the writer” and “Munro the mother.”

“I think that it’s perhaps both productive and dangerous to read an author’s work biographically,” she added. “It may allow us (the readers) to think we may understand things, but there are things we can never truly know about the lives and intentions of writers.”

One of the Munro stories that van den Berg and Mukherjee plan to teach is “Friend of My Youth,” narrated by a woman long estranged from her mother, whose “ideas were in line with some progressive notions of her times, and mine echoed the notions that were favored in mine.” Mukherjee, a Booker Prize finalist in 2014 for the novel “The Lives of Others,” is unsure about how, or whether, to work in the recent news about Munro when teaching ”Friend of My Youth,” which the author had dedicated to her own mother.

He believes in separating the “art from the artist, that we all have done bad things.” He considers himself “very conflicted,” sharing van den Berg’s horror that Munro chose her husband over her daughter, but also finding that her work may have gained “richer depth, now that we know something in her life that she may have been trying to come to terms with.”

“I don’t see writers as would-be saints,” he says.

The Gunman and the Would-Be Dictator

Violence stalks the president who has rejoiced in violence to others.

A photomontage illustration of Donald Trump.

Listen to more stories on hark

When a madman hammered nearly to death the husband of then–House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Donald Trump jeered and mocked . One of Trump’s sons and other close Trump supporters avidly promoted false claims that Paul Pelosi had somehow brought the onslaught upon himself through a sexual misadventure.

After authorities apprehended a right-wing-extremist plot to abduct Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, Trump belittled the threat at a rally. He disparaged Whitmer as a political enemy. His supporters chanted “Lock her up.” Trump laughed and replied , “Lock them all up.”

Fascism feasts on violence. In the years since his own supporters attacked the Capitol to overturn the 2020 election—many of them threatening harm to Speaker Pelosi and Vice President Mike Pence—Trump has championed the invaders, would-be kidnappers, and would-be murderers as martyrs and hostages. He has vowed to pardon them if returned to office. His own staffers have testified to the glee with which Trump watched the mayhem on television.

Now the bloodshed that Trump has done so much to incite against others has touched him as well. The attempted murder of Trump—and the killing of a person nearby—is a horror and an outrage. More will be learned about the man who committed this appalling act, and who was killed by the Secret Service. Whatever his mania or motive, the only important thing about him is the law-enforcement mistake that allowed him to bring a deadly weapon so close to a campaign event and gain a sight line of the presidential candidate. His name should otherwise be erased and forgotten.

It is sadly incorrect to say, as so many have, that political violence “has no place” in American society. Assassinations, lynchings, riots, and pogroms have stained every page of American political history. That has remained true to the present day. In 2016 , and even more in 2020, Trump supporters brought weapons to intimidate opponents and vote-counters. Trump and his supporters envision a new place for violence as their defining political message in the 2024 election. Fascist movements are secular religions. Like all religions, they offer martyrs as their proof of truth. The Mussolini movement in Italy built imposing monuments to its fallen comrades. The Trump movement now improves on that: The leader himself will be the martyr in chief, his own blood the basis for his bid for power and vengeance.

Christopher R. Browning: A new kind of fascism

The 2024 election was already shaping up as a symbolic contest between an elderly and weakening liberalism too frail and uncertain to protect itself and an authoritarian, reactionary movement ready to burst every barrier and trash every institution. To date, Trump has led only a minority of U.S. voters, but that minority’s passion and audacity have offset what it lacks in numbers. After the shooting, Trump and his backers hope to use the iconography of a bloody ear and face, raised fist, and call to “Fight!” to summon waverers to their cause of installing Trump as an anti-constitutional ruler, exempted from ordinary law by his allies on the Supreme Court.

Other societies have backslid to authoritarianism because of some extraordinary crisis: economic depression, hyperinflation, military defeat, civil strife. In 2024, U.S. troops are nowhere at war. The American economy is booming, providing spectacular and widely shared prosperity. A brief spasm of mild post-pandemic inflation has been overcome. Indicators of social health have abruptly turned positive since Trump left office after years of deterioration during his term. Crime and fatal drug overdoses are declining in 2024; marriages and births are rising. Even the country’s problems indirectly confirm the country’s success: Migrants are crossing the border in the hundreds of thousands, because they know, even if Americans don’t, that the U.S. job market is among the hottest on Earth.

Yet despite all of this success, Americans are considering a form of self-harm that in other countries has typically followed the darkest national failures: letting the author of a failed coup d’état return to office to try again.

One reason this self-harm is nearing consummation is that American society is poorly prepared to understand and respond to radical challenges, once those challenges gain a certain mass. For nearly a century, “radical” in U.S. politics has usually meant “fringe”: Communists, Ku Kluxers, Black Panthers, Branch Davidians, Islamist jihadists. Radicals could be marginalized by the weight of the great American consensus that stretches from social democrats to business conservatives. Sometimes, a Joe McCarthy or a George Wallace would throw a scare into that mighty consensus, but in the past such challengers rarely formed stable coalitions with accepted stakeholders in society. Never gaining an enduring grip on the institutions of state, they flared up and burned out.

Trump is different. His abuses have been ratified by powerful constituencies. He has conquered and colonized one of the two major parties. He has defeated—or is on the way to defeating—every impeachment and prosecution to hold him to account for his frauds and crimes. He has assembled a mass following that is larger, more permanent, and more national in reach than any previous American demagogue. He has dominated the scene for nine years already, and he and his supporters hope they can use yesterday’s appalling event to extend the Trump era to the end of his life and beyond.

The American political and social system cannot treat such a person as an alien. It inevitably accommodates and naturalizes him. His counselors, even the thugs and felons, join the point-counterpoint dialogue at the summit of the American elite. President Joe Biden nearly wrecked his campaign because he felt obliged to meet Trump in debate. How could Biden have done otherwise? Trump is the three-time nominee of the Republican Party; it’s awkward and strange to treat him as an insurrectionist against the American state—though that’s what Trump was and is.

David Frum: Biden’s heartbreaking press conference

The despicable shooting at Trump, which also caused death and injury to others, now secures his undeserved position as a partner in the protective rituals of the democracy he despises. The appropriate expressions of dismay and condemnation from every prominent voice in American life have the additional effect of habituating Americans to Trump’s legitimacy. In the face of such an outrage, the familiar and proper practice is to stress unity, to proclaim that Americans have more things in common than that divide them. Those soothing words, true in the past, are less true now.

Nobody seems to have language to say: We abhor, reject, repudiate, and punish all political violence, even as we maintain that Trump remains himself a promoter of such violence, a subverter of American institutions, and the very opposite of everything decent and patriotic in American life.

The Republican National Convention, which opens this week, will welcome to its stage apologists for Vladimir Putin’s Russia and its aggression against U.S. allies. Trump’s own infatuation with Russia and other dictatorships has not dimmed even slightly with age or experience. Yet all of these urgent and necessary truths must now be subordinated to the ritual invocation of “thoughts and prayers” for someone who never gave a thought or uttered a prayer for any of the victims of his own many incitements to bloodshed. The president who used his office to champion the rights of dangerous people to own military-type weapons says he was grazed by a bullet from one such assault rifle.

Conventional phrases and polite hypocrisy fill a useful function in social life. We say “Thank you for your service” both to the decorated hero and to the veteran who barely escaped dishonorable discharge. It’s easier than deciphering which was which. We wish “Happy New Year!” even when we dread the months ahead.

Adrienne LaFrance: Thoughts, prayers, and Facebook rants aren’t enough

But conventional phrases don’t go unheard. They carry meanings, meanings no less powerful for being rote and reflexive. In rightly denouncing violence, we are extending an implicit pardon to the most violent person in contemporary U.S. politics. In asserting unity, we are absolving a man who seeks power through the humiliation and subordination of disdained others.

Those conventional phrases are inscribing Trump into a place in American life that he should have forfeited beyond redemption on January 6, 2021. All decent people welcome the sparing of his life. Trump’s reckoning should be with the orderly process of law, not with the bloodshed he rejoiced in when it befell others. He and his allies will exploit a gunman’s vicious criminality as their path to exonerate past crimes and empower new ones. Those who stand against Trump and his allies must find the will and the language to explain why these crimes, past and planned, are all wrong, all intolerable—and how the gunman and Trump, at their opposite ends of a bullet’s trajectory, are nonetheless joined together as common enemies of law and democracy.

About the Author

IMAGES

Write an Essay on Science-Its Uses and Abuses//English Essay
A Guide to Writing Scientific Essays
Uses and abuses of Science
THE TEACHING OF SCIENCE (ESSAY V)
What are the uses and abuses of mobile phones?
Write a paragraph on the uses and abuses of mobile phone.

VIDEO

Write An Essay On "The Importance Of Scientific Education"
Write an essay on Science is a blessing or Boon
English Essay Writing
Uses and Abuses of Science Urdu Essay Writing
Is Science a Blessing or Curse ? || Essay on Science advantage or disadvantage || English Essay
Essay On Science Boon Or Curse Essay On Science

COMMENTS

Uses And Abuses Of Science Essay
The Uses And Abuses Of Science essay 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 500 words in English helps the students with their class assignments, comprehension tasks, and even for competitive examinations. You can also find more Essay Writing articles on events, persons, sports, technology and many more.
Essay on Uses and Abuses of Science
Essay on Uses and Abuses of Science: This is the age of science. Science has changed entire world. It is not the same world that our ancestors lived in. If they were to return today, they would certainly not be able to recognise the place. ... Ideas, Easy Tips to Write Essay Writing and many more. Essay on Uses and Abuses of Science 300 Words ...
The Use and Abuse of Science
1 Introduction: The Misuse of Science. The claims of objectivity mean, as we have seen, that gaining knowledge is an essentially social phenomenon, pursued with a view to satisfying the demands of public scrutiny. And like other social phenomena, there is a moral dimension to this activity. More spectacular aspects of this are familiar enough.
Essay on Uses and abuses of science in 200
If we use it in a proper way, it can make our life happy. But always remember that the wrong way use of science may very dangerous for the world. Also read. Essay on The Television; Essay on Delhi metropolitan city; Essay on Uses and abuses of science in 200 - 300 words PDF Essay on Uses and abuses of science in 200 - 300 words [Download not ...
Essay On Uses and Abuses of Science
Essay On Uses and Abuses of Science. Use of science brought about a great change: At the dawn of civilization man developed a scientific outlook. With the help of science he made observation and experiment, though they were crude at first. he discovered the relationship between a cause and its effect. He discovered some secrets of nature.
Essays About Science: Top 12 Examples And Prompts
3. Reflections from a Nobel winner: Scientists need time to make discoveries by Donna Strickland. "We must give scientists the opportunity through funding and time to pursue curiosity-based, long-term, basic-science research. Work that does not have direct ramifications for industry or our economy is also worthy.
The use and abuse of science and technology: rethinking dual-use
It is a process of indoctrinating students and researchers into the current dominant narrative of biosecurity governance. The duality, in its general form, might then be considered as a balancing not of military and civil applications of science and technology, but as balancing 'use' and 'abuse'. Normalising researchers into a ...
Essay on Uses and Abuses of Science
No one claims for certain that science is complete happiness or an impending curse. However, the latest triumphs and victories of science need to be properly utilized, otherwise, they can bring certain death and destruction to the human race. An essay on Uses and Abuses of Science in 795 words. Use this great essay as a model and write your own ...
benefits of science essay with quotations
This is a long English essay on the uses and abuses of science. This essay explains the benefits of science and technology with quotations. The uses of science has emerged as both merits and demerits. This essay is for 2nd year students for college level.
Write an Essay on Science-Its Uses and Abuses//English Essay
English Essay on Science It's Uses and AbusesCredit for music goes to NCS Release music #essayonscienceitsusesandabuses#scienceitsusesandabuses#englishessay#...
Abusing science
3. SMOKING IS HARMLESS. Tobacco has a long history in America, beginning with its cultivation by Native Americans, but the commercialization of tobacco by early British colonists—and the profits it generated—would provide, centuries later, an incentive for the abuse of science using sophisticated methods that now serve as a playbook for other industries and ideologies.
Essay on Uses and Abuses of Science.
Radio and telecommunications, X-Ray and electricity, rotary and railways are all the works of science. So at present the uses of science are many and varied. Abuses of science: Modern man has begun to abuse his scientific knowledge, invention of atom bomb is the burning example of it.
Paragraph on Uses and abuses of Science
Science has taught us how to use the gifts of nature. Abuses of science: Man uses science for the bane of his fellow beings too. The industrial and vehicular pollution is a major harmful effects of the abusive usage of science. Man has used science to make deadly weapons. Two Great World wars killed a great number of people and destroyed big ...
Uses and Abuses of Science
Home Essay Writing Uses and Abuses of Science. Uses and Abuses of Science. Essay Writing, According to Newton's third law "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." So Science can be a blessing and a curse at the same time. Science can be the greatest of the blessings and the worst of the curses.
Uses and Abuses of Science
Science ia an objective study of nature and its laws. It is an unending search for truth. It is the most useful quest of man. It has proved a faithful friend of mankind. Its great services in the fields of agriculture, industry, medicineand travelling are amazing. It has increased human comfort with its vast range of inventions.
Uses and abuses of Science
Science being a mother of invention has created a new world with its bloodless revolution. Man has invented machines in countless number for the benefits and comforts of a human being. Science has brought a marvelous revolution in the modern world. All progress of a country depends upon the progress in science. Science has both merits and demerits.
Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet
Paragraph on Uses and Abuses of Internet; 250 Words Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet Introduction. The internet, a revolutionary invention of the 20th century, has transformed our lives in profound ways. It has become an indispensable tool in various sectors, including education, business, communication, and entertainment.
Uses and Abuses of Modern Science Free Essay Example
Since the dawn of civilization, science or systematic study is behind step-by-step progress to the present position. Science has made a rapid stride in the 20th century. From a pin to rocket, we can see the marvels of science. Today science has become a part and parcel of our existence.
Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet
Essay / By Rahul Kumar / January 5, 2024. The advent of the internet has ushered in an era of unprecedented connectivity, transforming the way we live, work, and communicate. As a powerful tool that shapes various facets of our daily lives, the internet presents a duality - a spectrum of uses and potential abuses.
Essay on Science is a Blessing or Curse with Quotations for Students
As far as the question of science is a blessing or curse is concerned, it is obvious that everything has its uses and abuses. Science can be used both as a curse or a blessing. It totally depends on the human beings how they prefer to use it. The usage of these gifts of science for a positive aim will surely give sweet results but its negative ...
SOLUTION: Essay:uses and abuses of science
Science is persistent pursuit of Knowledge, skill and enlightenment. Itreveals sheer truths, facts and bare realities of the universe. It is based ... Writing. chevron_right. Health & Medical. chevron_right. Economics. chevron_right. Engineering. chevron_right. Computer Science. chevron_right. Law.
Uses And Abuses Of Science Essay
Uses And Abuses Of Science Essay | Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science for Students and Children in English. See also free essay on Indian Railways
ChatGPT Isn't 'Hallucinating'—It's Bullshitting!
When you write a document, you'll probably be asked whether you need your "AI assistant." Open a PDF and you might be asked whether you want an AI to provide you with a summary.
PC Learning Commons writing tutor Kevin Flanagan helps students build
Ask Phoenix College writing tutor Kevin Flanagan what a typical day in the Learning Commons is like, and it's anything but typical. Requests for writing support come via in-person visits, online appointments, and Online Writing Lab submissions, where students send in an essay or paper for review. Kevin noted most students come in with a specific issue.
Science must protect thinking time in a world of instant ...
Researchers should study their impact on science, and how they can claw back time to concentrate. ... compiling data, assessing results, reviewing literature and, of course, writing. Yet, thinking ...
Uses And Abuses Of Science Essay
The Uses And Abuses Of Science essay 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 500 words in English helps the students with their class assignments, comprehension tasks, and even for competitive examinations. You can also find more Essay Writing articles on events, persons, sports, technology and many more.
Educators wonder how to teach the writings of Alice Munro in wake of
She alleged that he continued to harass and abuse her for the next few years, losing interest when she reached her teens. In her 20s, she told her mother about Fremlin's abuse. But Munro, after briefly leaving Fremlin, returned and remained with him until his death in 2013. ... sometimes described as "Saint Alice." A New York Times essay ...
The Gunman and the Would-Be Dictator
After the shooting, Trump and his backers hope to use the iconography of a bloody ear and face, raised fist, and call to "Fight!" to summon waverers to their cause of installing Trump as an ...

Uses And Abuses Of Science Essay | Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science for Students and Children in English

Long Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science 500+ Words for Kids and Students in English

Short Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science 300 Words for Kids and Students in English

Essay on Uses and Abuses of Science | Uses and Abuses of Science Essay for Students and Children in English

Essay on Uses and Abuses of Science 300 Words for Kids and Students in English

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

The Use and Abuse of Science

Cite this chapter

Access this chapter

Author information

Rights and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Download citation

Share this chapter

Essay on Uses and abuses of science in 200 – 300 words

Essay on Uses and abuses of science in 200 – 300 words PDF

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Essay On Uses and Abuses of Science

Please Share This Share this content

You Might Also Like

Essay On Swami Dayanand Saraswati

Essays About Science: Top 12 Examples and Prompts

1. The challenging environment for science in the 21st century by Nithaya Chetty

5. T. Rex Like You Haven’t Seen Him: With Feathers by Jason Farago

4. ​​ The fact of cloning by Cesar Hill

Writing Prompts on Essays about Science

The use and abuse of science and technology: rethinking dual-use

Share this:

benefits of science essay with quotations

No comments:

Trending Topics

Abusing science

Michael J. Dougherty

1. INTRODUCTION

2. CREATIONISM

3. SMOKING IS HARMLESS

4. FOLLOWING A COMMON PLAYBOOK

5. CONCLUSION

Essay on Uses and Abuses of Science.

Related Articles:

Privacy Overview

Paragraph on Uses and abuses of Science

eEnglishGrammar.com

Post A Comment:

Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet

100 Words Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet

The Abuses of Internet

250 Words Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet

Uses of Internet

Abuses of Internet

500 Words Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet

Uses of the Internet

Abuses of the Internet

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Uses and Abuses of Modern Science

Essay on Uses and Abuses of Internet

Related Posts

How To Write An Argumentative Essay On Political Science?

Creative Essay Writing Techniques: How To Write a Creative Essay

10 Lines on My Mother in English

Essay on Science is a Blessing or Curse with Quotations for Students

Science is a Blessing or Curse Essay with Quotes for Class 10, Class 12 (2nd Year) and Graduation Examination

Essay Writing 101: The Basics That Every Writer Should Know

Students and Social Service Essay with Quotations

Load Shedding in Pakistan Essay – 1200 Words

Access over 35 million academic & study documents

24/7 Study Help

Similar Documents

Ongoing Conversations

Uses And Abuses Of Science Essay | Essay on Uses And Abuses Of Science for Students and Children in English

© Copyright-2024 Allrights Reserved

ChatGPT Isn’t ‘Hallucinating’—It’s Bullshitting!

On supporting science journalism

Science must protect thinking time in a world of instant communication

Stop, drop and think

Quality check

Related Articles

Postdoctoral Research Scientist

Associate or Senior Editor (Chemical Engineering), Nature Sustainability

4. The fact of cloning by Cesar Hill