"The Tree of Possibles" by Bernard Weber - insight in natural sciences is more important

Please respond to one of the following quotations in an essay of not more than 300 words. It is not necessary to research, read, or refer to the texts from which these quotations are taken; we are looking for original, personal responses to these short excerpts. Remember that your essay should be personal in nature and not simply an argumentative essay.

-----------------------

"10 minutes later, Silvia attached a speaker to the tree bark and played hard rock. It was <Thunder Struck> by AC/DC. The scale of galvanometer rose to 14. Then, she played <The Four Seasons> by Antonio Vivaldi. The scale came down to 6." - "The Tree of Possibles" by Bernard Weber

When my eyes swept upon this sentence, I had a feeling that this could be possible in reality, not just a mere sci-fi novel. In order to prove that plants can respond differently to genres of music, I designed my own experiment. My hypothesis was 'Cabbage seeds will germinate more rapidly when exposed to jaunty music,' Setting up three groups of cabbage seeds in the Petri Dishes, I turned on speakers so that first group can listen to <The Four Seasons> by Antonio Vivaldi, second can listen to <Heretic Anthem> by Slipknot, and third can listen to no music. For three months, I woke up half an hour earlier than usual to count the number of germinated cabbage seeds. To attain accurate data, I strictly applied the control variables and counted the number twice a day at the same time. After analyzing the data I have got, it turned out that cabbage seeds that were exposed to classical music germinated the fastest. This was the moment I first stepped into a world of biology, led by an insight, just like which Watson and Crick had when unraveling the mystery of DNA structure. However, insight was not the only thing that made the results of my experiment. Accurate empirical evidence from observation was the baseline of this small, yet monumental discovery in my life.

Both insight and rigorous reasoning are significant in natural sciences as they are in intimate relationship. No one factor dominates the other- when two factors are counterbalanced, that will produce the optimum results.

please leave comments on my grammar and content. I would be happy to read your essay too :-) Thank you

Hello !

I think you answered the question clearly and subtly. Your first paragraph is very good. However, your last conclusion doesn't really sound like it have been learned from the experience you describe before. You might want to change your conslusion, or to make the text have rigor as an important point of your experience. I wan see the attempt with the "strictly" but try to talk about rigor in analyzing the data , How strictly were the control variables set ?

That I think is the only thing that could enforce you essay, but overall it is great !

Hello, there is my answer to the same question. I figured out that maybe we could help each other. I know it is not very personal but I didn't learn to do so.

I believe that both insight and rigor have an equally important role in mathematics and natural sciences. Insight is fundamental to the creation of a science. When I learned about Pythagore, I realized that this school discovered the theorem insightfully: rigor would have actually stopped the free brain-teasing and the proliferation of ideas. Insight is to creation what rigor is to application. In fact, what would be the aim of the natural sciences if they weren't applied rigorously? To use our knowledge acquired through natural sciences, we have to attain accuracy. Would you imagine a Doctor gently waiting for the results on his patient? Although his goodwill and watchful eyes are irreprocheable, his intuition needs a meticulously foreseeing process to succeed.

Furthermore, Maths and Natural sciences are inherently associated to each other and these two qualities find themselves always revolving around each other. The more we know about Maths, the more we are able to verify and assert physical and biological rules. Developping functions gave us the ability to predict the upcoming results by the vertices and the slope of a function. Although one would insightfully remark that if the clouds are aggregated, it might rain; this information is very poor compared to what a meteorologist can tell using precisely gathered data and riorously developped models.

The best way we can use natural science to our benefit is not only by cheking and taking note of the exeprimental results, but being able to ensure the issue of an experiment what requires exactitude; insight couldn't forecast the effects of global warming and we are now dismally looking backward at that event.

Thus, I think that rigor and insight are both part of the same process and mastering not only one of them, but both of them at the same time is what makes a scientific.

isnt it Pythagoras/Pythagoras Theorem? not Pythagore? please check again


I am confused with this sentence. maybe you could change it a bit


Docter -> docter


meticulously -> meticulous


developing


developed


The best way to use natural science to our benefit is not onlyby checking and taking note of the experimental results, but alsoby ensuring the issue of an experiment...


not only ... but also.... you are missing 'but also', but try not to use same structure twice

I am not a native English speaker so I might have missed some grammar mistakes. Also, if you are not sure about my corrections, please please double check because i might be wrong

In english quotation marks always look like this "blahblahblah" (not <<blahblahblah>> or <blahblahblah> as they do in french.) So just make sure you adjust those song titles before submitting.