Analysis of Science vs. Medieval Thinking

Added on - 08 May 2020

  • 6

    Pages

  • 1444

    Words

  • 325

    Views

  • 0

    Downloads

Trusted by +2 million users,
1000+ happy students everyday
Showing pages 1 to 3 of 6 pages
Running head: CRITICAL WRITINGCritical WritingName of the Student:Name of the University:Author’s Note:
1CRITICAL WRITINGThis essay introduces a critical analysis and thinking of the article “science versusmedieval thinking” by Spears, 2013. The article explains the impact of science and medievalthinking of the society on vaccinations thereby, getting rid of the diseases. According to me, anarticle needs to highlight clearly the objective so that the readers are able to have an idea of thearticle by reading the title. The given article “science vs. medieval thinking” highlights that thearticle will emphasize its take on the impact of science and medieval thinking on disease andtreatment. However, on the contrary, I think, the title of the article needs to be precise andconcise rather than giving a highlight to the readers. This article sheds light on the persistingcontradictory views of vaccines and genetically modified crops among the population.According to me, the language of an article plays a crucial role in engaging the readers.However, on the contrary, I think the language used needs to be professional as well as simple inorder to connect with the readers. In the case of the given article, the language used by the authoris extremely simple that hampers the quality of the article to a certain extent. The articlesuccessfully explains the graphs and the percentage of the people in the 19thcentury sufferingfrom diseases rather than explaining the thinking of the individuals behind the cause.Additionally, the report also states the view of the educated people of the 21stcentury but lackedto provide a detailed insight of them about vaccination and genetically modified crops.According to me, the article title and the objectives need to support each other for helpingthe readers. However, the title of the article does not highlight the objective of the article. Thearticle title says ‘science vs. medieval thinking” but fails to highlight which aspect is discussed interms of science and medieval thinking. Therefore, the title fails to provide an overview of thetopic that is explained through science and medieval thinking. However, I also think, theobjectives provide a shape to the article thereby, successfully completing it. In the case of the
2CRITICAL WRITINGgiven article by Tom Spears “Science vs. Medieval Thinking”, the article fails to develop distinctobjectives through the entire article. Therefore, the article lacks proper structure thereby, makingit disorganized. I think lack of appropriate structure has made the report look haphazard thereby,making it difficult for the readers to understand the chronological order.The report highlights the medieval thinking about vaccines and genetically modifiedcrops that resulted in outbreaks and plaque in the US. According to me, the appropriate structureof the article is required to make the article look professional. However, as I also think, thestructure of the article does not always define the credibility of the work. This article does notfollow a definite structure thereby, making it confusing. The first part of the article highlights themedieval thinking of vaccines and genetically modified crops whereas the second part consists ofthe scientific aspect of the vaccines and genetically modified crops that people developed in the21stcentury due to exposure to education.An article needs to appropriately referenced in order to determine the authenticity of thedata and information used. According to me, appropriate sourcing provides credibility to theresearch. However, in the case of the article written by Tom Spears “Science vs. medievalthinking”, the entire writing lacks referencing of the data and information provided. However,the information used by the author is intriguing but reliability in an issue in this case. The authorhas majorly presented facts and information without mentioning the appropriate source ofcollecting the information. Therefore, the reliability of the article is questionable due to lack ofreferences.According to me, the explanation of the facts and science and their implications areimportant in order to enhance the quality of the article. However, on the contrary, I think, a large
desklib-logo
You’re reading a preview
Preview Documents

To View Complete Document

Click the button to download
Subscribe to our plans

Download This Document