While reading Dr. Pennock’s Chapter Four: Attentiveness and the Love of Nature, my thoughts consistently went towards Darwin and his character. During the reading, Dr. Pennock mentions that there is a “familiar stereotype of the cold-hearted, emotionless scientist.” I think in today’s society we have this going on, but if you get to know the the scientists you would find out how passionate and emotionally invested in science they really are. As mentioned in the text, I think that Darwin is a great example of a scientist who does not conform to this stereotype. Charles Darwin was passionate and truly loved science, and this showed not only through the work that he accomplished but the way he jumps right back into his work after being ill. The chapter goes on to talk about how attentiveness and curiosity are closely related, and how both make people better scientist. I believe that this is true. Curiosity provides motivation to a scientist, which will lead to them going out and discovering new things. The attentiveness allows these same people to pay close attention to detail and make their scientific discoveries more successful. The curiosity and attentiveness that Charles Darwin portrays throughout his life came to mind when reading this part of the chapter. Darwin — from a young age — was curious about the world, and this curiosity grew with his voyage on the Beagle. He also talks about the attentiveness and attention to detail that he has throughout his life, which allows him to be able to discover what he does. This same thing can also be seen with Benjamin Franklin. Throughout his life, Franklin was always reading and trying to understand how and why things were the way they were — he was curious. He allows was always paying attention to the details of his work, and the work around him; which can be seen in his printing press work. Both Franklin’s curiosity and attentiveness allowed him to be the great scientist that he was. I think that without these two traits, scientist would not be as thorough in their work, or the work would not be done at all.
I thought that Thoreau’s The Pond in Winter was very interesting, and there is a lot of meaning behind it. I noticed how he brings up the timeless (or infinite) aspect of himself, and how water becomes a metaphor for heaven and the human soul. It seems, to me, that Thoreau was trying to say that even after death we live on and leave a legacy. I believe that this is true, especially for scientists like Darwin and Franklin. Both Darwin and Franklin live on today through their work. I think that this is a powerful thing, and I find it very interesting that Thoreau as able to bring it up by talking about a frozen pond in the winter.
The other obituary that I read was on Seymour Papert, who was an expert on IT, learning, and artificial intelligence. Obituary URL: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/obituaries/2016/08/11/seymour-papert-artificial-intelligence-guru--obituary/
I thought that Thoreau’s The Pond in Winter was very interesting, and there is a lot of meaning behind it. I noticed how he brings up the timeless (or infinite) aspect of himself, and how water becomes a metaphor for heaven and the human soul. It seems, to me, that Thoreau was trying to say that even after death we live on and leave a legacy. I believe that this is true, especially for scientists like Darwin and Franklin. Both Darwin and Franklin live on today through their work. I think that this is a powerful thing, and I find it very interesting that Thoreau as able to bring it up by talking about a frozen pond in the winter.
The other obituary that I read was on Seymour Papert, who was an expert on IT, learning, and artificial intelligence. Obituary URL: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/obituaries/2016/08/11/seymour-papert-artificial-intelligence-guru--obituary/