Science and Society

1. What similarities and differences do you find in the research process of Armand Denis and Ignaz Semmelweis?

Both Denis and  Semmelweis were engaged in a research process that piqued their interests , went through struggles, failed attempts and had some coincidences. But while Semmelweis started off with an observation, proceeded to find the cause by doing research and experiments to reach a concrete conclusion, Denis started with an assumption, sought support from others to verify it but wasn't  completely able to prove his hypothesis.


Armand Denis needed helping hands to conduct his research and had to bribe them . Semmelweis on the other hand seemed to have got them easily in hospital. While Denis only turned to the human resource available, semmelweis also studied the existing literature to be familiarized with the possible explanation of his observation. Semmelweis preserved throughout the research. Denis had given up his idea after the first attempt except for the coincidence. Denis didn't have to perform experiments during his research like Semmelweis did. It wasn't certain that the four tusked elephant really existed but it was proved that childbed fever and deaths were caused by infection due to unwashed hand used in delivery of women.


In spite of differences, some similarities in the research process is palpable. For instance, coincidence played a vital role to guide Denis again to the research process and provided the reason for childbed fever that Semmelweis had overlooked, through the death of his friend. Both Denis and Semmelweis faced difficulties to reach the conclusion of their research process and made some ethical breaches.

2. Did you find any instance of ethical breach in the research process of Denis and Semmelweis?

Armand Denis bribed a person and indirectly supported animal hunting and poaching. Semmelweis subjected healthy women for his experiments only to kill them , all the while being aware of the possible outcome. In both cases the researchers didn't follow ethical practices and hence caused an ethical breach.

Animals and Human both have rights and rights to live is one of them. Semmelweis treated pregnant women as experimental tools and attended the childbirth without disinfecting the hands just for the sake of providing his hypothesis a concrete evidence. Eleven out of twelve women died of fever. This is against the ethical practice to be followed by a researcher because humans can't be subjected to experiments. Similarly, Denis bought the poached tusks and indirectly helped in poaching. This is against animal rights. Denis bribed the pygmies with tobacco and then he bribed Mombeli with the valuable things he possessed. Taking and giving bribe is another unethical practice.

Though Semmelweis and Denis had the right reasons for their research process, both of them violated the rights of humans or animals or bribed for obtaining things. These were the instances of ethical breach. So, one must always abide by the ethical rules while conducting research and experiments.

3. Which of the three texts did you find
a. Most convincing?
b. Most memorable?
c. Most difficult?
   Why?

Among the three texts, 'Scientific Inquiry ', 'The Four Tusks Elephant' and 'To Know a Fly', I found 'To know a Fly' to be the most convincing one because it taught us the right sequence  of carrying out a research in a scientific manner. Similarly Carl Hempel's 'Scientific Inquiry' seemed to be most difficult because it consisted some medical terms and the explicit show of  ethical breach was hard to digest. ' The Four Tusks Elephant' was the most memorable because it has a mysterious story that captured our full attention and a good lesson of not giving up, that is bound to stick to our memory.


Though all three texts have undoubtedly managed to convey the theme of how a scientific inquiry is conducted , they have  different way of doing that. Armand Denis used a narrative approach which is seen in stories and picked  a very interesting story to show how he did his scientific inquiry. The elements of struggles , mystery, adventure and passion, all added up to make the story a memorable one.

Hempel  used an illustrative approach which would have been easier to grasp except for the things he did to carry out the research. Was the writer saying us to get the result of a scientific inquiry by any means even if it meant killing people? Also some medical terms were difficult for me to understand.

Dethier used an instructive approach and presented his text in a sarcastic tone. He has explicitly mentioned the gist of his writing on the begining of the text. Though people find
this text to be a difficult one (because he puzzles the readers by moving from one way of writing to another), I found it to be an engaging and insightful read. Through multiple examples, the writer has managed to make the message clear not only by presenting the right way but also the wrong way so that we could avoid it.