Argumentative Essay on Curiosity in Science

Introduction

The very own nature of science is curiosity, and there is no science without curiosity. Disciplines such as medicine, technology, and architecture all came from a human desire to learn about the world, and asking questions and thus the development of science. For instance, the smallpox vaccine, one of the deadliest diseases on the planet, came to be discovered by a small town farmer, who noticed that his milkmaids were not getting sick ("Curiosity: Why study Science?," n.d.). It is this wonder that gave birth to the little question, "why?" which upon further scrutiny grows into a full idea. This nature of human questioning and wonder of ordinary life becomes a science. Notably, all human beings are natural scientists, and the very nature of wanting to know why things are the way they are makes the person a scientist ("Why curiosity is the secret to scientific breakthroughs," n.d.). But it is those who not only as the question but those who seek to find answers through research who deserve to be real scientists.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

In an interview by Carey, Dan Kahan argues that curiosity is needed to clear misconceptions and create new conceptions about the understanding of climate change and vaccines ("Curiosity 'not just knowledge 'about science influences public perceptions about vaccines, climate change," 2017). Kahan defines science curiosity as the innate desire in a scientist to seek and consume new scientific information primarily for the pleasure of doing so. This kind of curiosity goes beyond the desire of people in school to consume science to perform well and involves a drive by the pure activity of up taking all that science knows("Why curiosity is the secret to scientific breakthroughs," n.d.). As a result, great curiosity in people creates a willingness to take up new information and put them under consideration before arriving into conclusive opinions about the world around them. This effect of curiosity may not necessarily change people's mind, but further betters their thinking about certain issues ("Curiosity 'not just knowledge 'about science influences public perceptions about vaccines, climate change," 2017). Most importantly, science-curious individuals should be committed to seeking information that is new, and upon getting new information that contradicts their predispositions, they should be open to change their perceptions. Such were the thoughts of Turner, who argues that new discoveries about the Background Imaging of Cosmic Extragalactic Polarization (BICEP2) on the understanding of the cosmos present to scientists a whole new understanding especially on the measurement of cosmic microwaves (Turner, 2014). In other words, there would be no growth or understanding of the world and how things work unless curiosity drives science.

The burning desire to know forms the beginning of bettering human existence and deeper understanding of human place in the cosmos. According to Turner on the Power of Curiosity, development in the knowledge and understanding of the cosmos is entirely based on curiosity. He points out those discoveries by the Background Imaging of Cosmic Extragalactic Polarization (BICEP2) in 2014 that took scientists back to 10-38 seconds old universe, forms a whole different understanding of the cosmos and overrules other scientific discoveries previously made (Turner, 2014). What Turner implies is that scientists cannot afford to be satisfied with scientific facts. The nature of science should be curiosity, and this should not stop upon having one single discovery but should continue to spark an interest to continue testing those facts with time. This argument also shows that new discovery presents new questions, the desire to continue questioning and advancing knowledge to understand the universe better.

Lindholm pointed out that curiosity is a wonder of the human mind, a thirst that cannot be quenched by finding new information. If anything, the discovery of new information only serves to increase the human desire to know (curiosity) (Lindholm, 2018). In modernity, epistemic curiosity is seen as a driving force for science, wealth and innovation. The basis of it is that apart from solving practical problems, knowledge answers the questions of who we are, where we all go and what is meaning (Turner, 2014). This kind of curiosity does not cease at all; rather, new knowledge serves to nourish it and consequently widens the cognitive horizons in new directions. It is the knowledge that fuels curiosity, which in turn penetrates deeper to present new questions. The arguments of Lindholm's are very accurate in explanation of what curiosity is and what its role is in the advancement of human understanding and science in general (Lindholm, 2018). A scientist ought not to be satisfied by the founding of new knowledge, rather, go ahead and ask questions to widen the understanding of different fields.

Further, the sole purpose of education should be seen as a virtue, which education seeks to nurture, and thus enable advancements in the field of science. Notably, curiosity has not always been viewed as a virtue in the past civilizations (Lindholm, 2018). The traditional set up of many societies saw people who were less curious as obedient, and those who conformed to the traditions of their societies. As a result, less scientific knowledge was advanced in these societies ("Why curiosity is the secret to scientific breakthroughs," n.d.). Studies comparing curiosity and the art of questioning parents comparing western middle-class children and non-western cultures indicate that while parents in the former appreciate children's questioning attribute, the latter see questioning as disobedient and disrespectful of the traditions. This difference in the perception of curiosity explains the gap that exists between such societies in relation to scientific advancement. Due to this fact, knowledge-driven curiosity ought to be appreciated as a cultural trait, if any society is to see advancement in science whatsoever (Lindholm, 2018). To achieve this, pedagogy and education may be a useful tool to nurture curiosity at childhood.

Notably, curiosity develops much at puberty in comparison to other ages, and this can largely help in advancing science. Scientists argue that at puberty, does not only sexual maturity occurs, but also the growth of the brain's frontal cortex, and as a result intellectual functioning speed up, cognitive processing, and executive functions become consolidated (Lindholm, 2018). Most significantly, this development further allows for the dissertation of self-images, and doubts develop on assumptions and beliefs previously held and taken for granted. Consequently, puberty is a period of questioning what is true and thus becomes a perfect mindset for anticipating science ("Why curiosity is the secret to scientific breakthroughs," n.d.). The development of this curious attribute help advances science, as science, unlike other disciplines, cannot be learned through retrieval and cramming. The critical efforts of a skeptical individual are what allow for discovery, and thus intellectual wondering and deep curiosity develops as a matter of existential importance. The worlds of Kieran Egan best illustrate the scenario (Lindholm, 2018). He claimed that educational achievement ought not to make the strange familiar, but cause the familiar seem strange to the individual. This thought explains that the very nature of science is the desire to know, curiosity.

There exists a great danger in contemporary science textbooks as their basis and mode of questions discourage curiosity. Conversely, the service to advance the "belief in science" and this is a potential danger towards the advancement of science in general (Lindholm, 2018). Notably, having results depicted in textbooks that have close-ended questions with clear-cut answers of reduced complexity conceals inconsistencies and paradoxes that sciences should be seeking to unveil. This nature of contemporary science thus hinders the individual journey of individual conquest that is a catalyst for scientific understanding. Exposure of students to scientific facts develops a danger, as they take the facts for granted and thus overrule any room for curiosity and doubt (Lindholm, 2018). To develop science, the basis ought to be between the known and the unknown, and the educational wellbeing can only be achieved through the development of urgent educational methods that serve to advance science instead of killing it.

Another threat that contradicts curiosity and that ought to be changed to advance science is the exaggerated use of models in high school sciences. Notably, models are indispensable for scientific knowledge and aim at stimulating causal relationships (Lindholm, 2018). However, the classroom use of models poses a potential danger of confusion between reality and models. Chiefly, they ought to primarily present a simplified illustration of a mechanistic relation, but are conversely represented as reality ("Why curiosity is the secret to scientific breakthroughs," n.d.). Consequently, students and even science teachers are made to understand science as a set of defined clear-cut truths. This conception discourages deep curiosity, as students growing curiosity is counteracted by the one-sided emphasis of the use of models. In as much as models are mandatory in science education, the teacher ought to present to the student's data that is not consistent with the model, once they enjoy its explanatory power (Lindholm, 2018). Consequently, this will result in new questions which further develop the knowledge of science. Therefore, teaching science should be based on a balance between theory-generating models and empirical phenomenology.

Conclusion

In conclusion, science is curiosity, and it is through curiosity that we better understand the world and how things work. For scientific and societal growth, curiosity is an essential factor as a driving force towards achieving it. Through curiosity, man has been able to achieve various disciplines, such as medicine and architecture, through the basic desire to inquire and seek to further understand the world around them. Contemporary science textbooks should aim at encouraging and cultivation the virtue of curiosity, rather than promote a culture of developing scientific beliefs to the students. Notably, the use of models in stimulating science learning, not only poses a challenge to students but also to the teachers. Science curious individuals should go beyond the consumption of science for the sake of educational achievement, but to consume science for the sake of it. To a greater extent, greater misconceptions about our understanding of the world can only be achieved through science curiosity, where individuals should be willing to let go previously held knowledge and misconceptions after the discovery of new knowledge. Therefore, curiosity and wonder is the way through which human understanding of the world can be advanced, and consequently advance science.

References

Curiosity: Why study Science? (n.d.). Retrieved March 28, 2019, from https://www.jcu.edu.au/brighter/articles/curiosity-why-study-science

Curiosity'not just knowledge'about science influences public perceptions about vaccines, climate change. (2017, February 19). Retrieved March 28, 2019, from https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/02/curiosity-not-just-knowledge-about-science-influences-public-perceptions-about-vaccines

Lindholm, M. (2018). Promoting Curiosity? Science & Education, 27(9-10), 987-1002. doi:10.1007/s11191-018-0015-7

Turner, M. S. (2014). The Power of Curiosity. Science, 344(6183), 449-449. doi:10.1126/science.1255182

Why curiosity is the secret to scientific breakthroughs. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/08/why-curiosity-is-the-secret-to-scientific-breakthroughs/...