[MCAT] Morality of Science

Consider this statement:

Scientific inquiry is rooted in the desire to discover, but there is no discovery so important that in its pursuit a threat to human life can be tolerated.

Write a unified essay in which you perform the following tasks.  Explain what you think the above statements means.  Describe a specific situation in which a threat to human life might be tolerated in the pursuit of scientific discovery. Discuss what you think determines when the pursuit of scientific discovery is more important than the protection of human life.

The statement suggests that, although curiosity for knowledge is a trait that characterizes human beings, it is not a justification for scientific inquiries. Most obviously, when a human life is threatened during an attempt in scientific discovery, the attempt is unacceptable regardless of its goal and procedure. One could quickly think of the horrific story of Frankenstein, where an experiment to raise the dead lead to devastation and destruction. Modern biotechnology research sometimes carry the same connotation, when lives of human subjects or even the public are sometimes in risk in the experiments. For example, the statement would argue strongly against the revitalization of extinct viruses for biochemical research.

The statement seems to suggest that any risk to human life is intolerable in the pursuit of knowledge, but such a stringent conclusion could cause much harm to humanity as well. The clear example would be the termination of the majority of medical research. Any new medication or medical procedure would involve a certain level of risk to test subjects or early users when it is first introduced. Without medicine, human beings would suffer from countless diseases and injuries, defeating the purpose of the statement to protect human lives.

Scientific research should not be justified based on the virtue of knowledge, as the statement suggests, but it should not be abandoned in the name of risk elimination either. Rather, a rigorous examination to evaluate the importance of the potential discovery, the risk involved in the procedure and how it is managed, and the likelihood that this procedure can achieve its goals could determine whether the experiment involving risk to human lives is acceptable. Only when the goal of the experiment is sufficiently important (for example, finding the cure for cancer), the risk is reasonably low (low statistical mortality rate in animal tests), and the risky procedure can reasonably be expected to achieve the said goal can the experiment be justifiable.

[MCAT] Education comes not from books but from practical experience.

Consider this statement:

Education comes not from books but from practical experience.

Write a unified essay in which you perform the following tasks.  Explain what you think the above statements means.  Describe a specific situation in which books might educate students better than practical experience. Discuss what you think determines when practical experience provides a better education than books do.

Education is the transmittance of knowledge or skills from a source to the students. The statement suggests that in order to achieve this, one must rely on practices or other hands-on experiential learning rather than books. Unlike the practical experience that hands-on activities provide, books are more passive and the authors tend to transmit their knowledge or skills unidirectionally to the readers.

Experiential learning is superior in most instances of education, because of the higher level of engagement of students that leads to better retainment. For example, one cannot learn to swim or do math by reading a book; one must practice, make mistakes, and learn from the errors. Only when students apply the skills or knowledge they learned in a practical setting such as swimming laps or doing math problems can these skills truly be learned.

However, some subjects must be learned from reading books. The study of ancient civilization, for example, may be more clearly laid out, more fully explained, and quite possibly more rigorously researched in books than in any forms of practical experience. This is because well-written books are more carefully written and reviewed than, say, an interpretive drama or televised documentary about the same topic. In the case of anthropological study of ancient civilization, where education through practical experience such as visiting the museum or forming discussion groups may be insufficient to replace the rigorous description and explanation books provide.

This is not to say experiential learning is not beneficial in subjects like anthropology. Visiting the museum will certainly help with the students' understanding of the civilizations they are studying. But if the students visit the museums without reading any books on this civilization, the exhibition would be nothing more than odd looking objects and mysterious texts.

Educators must be holistic in their approach to education. To claim that education comes not from books is too aggressive towards the traditional methodology, which may be less lively and engaging, but often more rigorous and informative. Practical experience provides a better education than passive reading of books when the material being taught is essentially a skill that can be learned through practice. However, for most cognitive, academic subjects, a strong background knowledge in the often abstract topics can only be obtained through books. In this case, practical experience may enhance the education, but it cannot replace books.