Studies one scientific essay - The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme, by evolutionary theorists Stephen Jay Gould and Richard C. Lewontin - as an example, to demonstrate and test new analytical approaches to scientific rhetoric.
"Each of the book's three sections addresses a distinct set of topics.
Science.
This book has been written to expose these phantoms as largely smoke and mirrors, and replace them with principles that make communicating research easier and encourage researchers to write confidently.
Writing seems impossible, with only dead ends in sight. The blocked writer may even feel as though they'll never write productively again. If you've felt this way, you're in excellent company, alongside such brilliant authors as Maya ...
This book takes an integrated approach, using the principles of story structure to discuss every aspect of successful science writing, from the overall structure of a paper or proposal to individual sections, paragraphs, sentences, and ...
This short, focused guide presents a dozen such principles based on what readers need in order to understand complex information, including concrete subjects, strong verbs, consistent terms, and organized paragraphs.
Melbourne: Allen and Unwin, 2001; pp 154–158. 9 Campion EW. Notification about early-release articles. N Engl J Med 1999;341:2085. 10 Voelker R. Publishers debate future of online journals. JAMA 2000;284:943–4. 11 Delamothe T, Mullner M ...
In addition, the book explains what causes so many scientific presentations to flounder. One of the most valuable contributions of this text is that it teaches the assertion-evidence approach to scientific presentations.
Authored book Murray PR, Rosenthal KS, Kobayashi GS, Pfaller MA. Medical microbiology. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002. 2. Edited book Gilstrap LC 3rd, Cunningham FG, VanDorsten JP, editors. Operative obstetrics. 2nd ed.
Is scientific theory really just a matter of persuasion? Do scientists merely invent rather than discover? Do scientists merely invent rather than discover? Indeed, do brute facts of nature gain meaning only within a rhetorical context?