Science has helped improve many people’s lifestyle from eating a healthy diet to stopping different form of disease that are attacking the human body. Science also provides intolerable lifestyle to people such as the elders as when the elderly have an incurable disease and the elderly are suffering for this incurable disease and wants to die, but cannot due to science advancement in technology making impossible to die at that moment. The possible future of science is uncontrollable.
The power of science provides possibility and with this possibility doesn’t always generate a good possibility. Jeremy Rifkin in “Biotech Century” and Michael Bishop in “Enemies of Promise” talks about the science as their argument in a casual sense of manner. The fear of the unknowingness of what science can provided for future can be argued in a causal manner with Rifkin and Bishop. The casual argument starts off with a typical argument in favor for science.
Science provides the people with the knowledge of the world as this knowledge will benefits the individual for the better. Science has provided people with the knowledge of the world by dissecting the world bits by bits as science will provide the people with facts about the mysteries of the world. Bishop stated, “But we scientist takes things apart in order to understand the whole, to solve the mystery—an enterprise that we regard as one of the great, ennobling tasks of humankind” (305).
To truly understand any matter a person must know every side to the matter. An example can be how the world before was flat as people thought the world was; however, yet science was able to find out that the world was round due to the fact that people weren’t able to fall off the world and also due to astronauts seeing the world from space. The fear of not knowing what science holds for the human race is the talk that people or author can related to.
On the other hand, the typical casual argument against science is the fear of what might happen when human truly finds out about human nature. The creation versus evolution is by far one of the greatest mysteries of the world, so when the facts comes out that creation or evolution is true; no human would truly know what to do from then on due to the many ideas and beliefs on both creation and evolution. The creation with all the religions belief or attachment will suddenly shatter as people relied or set their whole life around that belief.
There are people whom committed suicide because of a belief that was stated “It was the end of the world in May 21, 2011, Judgment day” and also went into financial shambles as those people who believed in their belief sold everything they own and left with nothing. Rifkin quoted, “Genesis could lead to a far different future—a biological Tower of Babel and the spread of chaos throughout the biological world, drowning out the ancient language of creation” (312).
This states that with biological creation creates more nonsense as the idea of the beginning creation of life seem invalid; in doing so, creates the idea of an ordinary human creating the whole world itself, due to time as time fades away the ancient language of creation. If creationism became true then many people would changes their ways as they thrives to find a religious purpose where sins or deeds that they acquired previously won’t have any effects against them such as killing a person previously and hoping that the person that he or she killed won’t affected by the idea of eternal darkness after death.
The fear of unknowing and suddenly becomes the knowing in which can cause chaotic measure for the human race. In addition, the unknown can be an issue as no one can anticipate what will truly happen when one tries to temper with the unknown outcome. The idea of creating genetic engineered organism into world’s ecosystem could possibly be a gain or could possibly be hazard to the ecosystem.
An organism such as a lion and a zebra is place in the ecosystem in a form of a circle as the lion’s prey on the zebra and the zebra preys on the plant and so on; however, an engineered organism is not part of any ecosystem which can cause problem due to the organism possibility of being the most dominate of all the life form or possibility that the organism become the prey of every type of organism in the ecosystem and dies off instantly.
Rifkin mentioned, “A genetically engineered organism is released, there is always a small chance that it, too, will run amok because, like non indigenous species, it has been artificially introduced into a complex environment that has developed a web of highly integrated relationships over long periods of evolutionary history” (313). As it stated, the unknown possibility of what might happen when the unknown organism enters the ecosystem as the organism can cause havoc. The fear of unknowing the true outcome of what sciences might offer can be extreme or maybe irreversible.
Thus, this can be identify as the casual argument between both author as Bishop explains that the people fears for the future with what science has to offer and while Rifkin explains the fear that science has to offer with the possibility that the offer that was provided will not be reversible. The power of science provided for the people can be overwhelming as people fears the possibility that can be acquired from science due to the almost no limitation of restriction on science in making of any type of creation.
This creation can possibly be fearful due to the creation unknown attributes as the creation can cause an irreversible action. In all, the casual argument revolves around the typical role of not knowing of what will happen if science did lean toward the best of science or worst of science. The possibility that science did what the people wanted or asked for or the possibility that the knowledge acquired from science will work against the people as nature should not be temper with. There will always be another side to the argument, so with this a quote from Bishop that summaries all of the casual argument “The same battles must still be fought. But fight them we must” (304).
Lunsford, Andrea A. , and John J. Ruszkiewicz. “J. Michael Bishop Enemies of Promise. ” The Presence ofOthers: Voices and Images That Call for Response. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. 304-10. Print. Lunsford, Andrea A. , and John J. Ruszkiewicz. Jeremy Rifkin Biotech Century: Playing Ecological Roulettewith Mother Nature’s Designs. ” The Presence of Others: Voices and Images That Call forResponse. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. 311-19. Print. lock, Elizabeth. “If the End of the World Is Not on May 21, What Will Camping’s Followers Do? “Washington Post. The Washington Post, 20 May 2011. Web. 16 Nov. 2012. ;http://www. washingtonpost. com/blogs/under-god/post/if-the-end-of-the-world-is-not-onmay-21-what-will-campings-followers-do/2011/05/20/AFWPfz7G_blog. html;.