The Carolyn Miller article we discussed in class sets up a very interesting argument not only just about technical writing and its place in curriculum, but also about how "absolute truths" are created. The positivist theory, according to Miller, believes that all facts are out there but it is the scientist's responsibility to discover them. Scientific and technical writing should "be objective, be unemotional, [and] be impersonal" according to the positivist belief.
Miller seems to argue an opposing view to these previously described beliefs and I agree. Knowledge is pertinent to every situation. Just like the religious "poem" example in class, the students made facts out of nothing. Without the right context, these students began to create something out of nothing. Similarly scientists each interpret data differently due to their own biases. It is human nature to read and decipher things to mean what you want them to mean. New inventions are created every day and what we as society used to believe as fact changes. Humans used to think that Earth was the center of the universe but with scientific advancement we have corrected these previously known "truths." Is anything really absolutely true?
I think earlier in the history of the world there were many things that were later proven not to be absolute truth. I think that being an engineer you know how many laws we assume to be absolutely true every time we work a problem.
ReplyDeleteIs anything really absolutely true? We can not say; the 'truths' we have now are simply models constructed by humans that seem to best approximate reality and predict future behaviors. It is in our best interests to accept these 'approximate' truths so we can move on with our lives and not worry about insignificant details.
ReplyDeleteAt least that's my take on it.