There is no hope of doing perfect research
I
agree with the subject statement that ‘there is no hope for perfect research’
because we live in an age that perfect research as I understand it remains just
an inference made by the concerned researcher. On the onset; research means the
systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to
establish facts and reach new conclusions. The word perfect means having all
the required elements, qualities or characteristics. We have been put to test
before in many ways during our existence and inevitably every one of us can
agree with me that no two findings are the same, no two persons are the same
and no two inferences are the same.
“No two gardens are the same.
No two days are the same in one garden”- is a famous quote by the writer Hugh
Johnson [Thomas, 1985, p115]. No two people express the same opinion and
thoughts. As these vary, their ideas and
thoughts on perceiving things vary. Research work eventually results in a
conclusion by a person on a particular concept and no two researchers conclude
the same thing.
I will use two of my dear and
research work used to teach me in class in my school days which I was made to
believe are gospel truth only to be continually faulted by the present
Mwaniki 2
findings which use well to do technology, equipment and
experiments all together. This will be the famous Newton’s Third law of motion
and the Pakistan green revolution.
At the time of green revolution in Pakistan chemical
fertilizers and insecticides were encouraged among the farmers in various ways
based on a continuous series of experiments on productivity of the cereal
crops. Subsequent to some years, the properties of soil and the environment
were influenced faultily due to application of such chemicals at farmers’ level
on the field. Currently, the community of researchers is advocating restricting
application of such chemicals on the field and advising the farmers to return
back to organic farming. This clearly explains that just because some
well-meaning researcher advised on their use and it brought good results at the
time doesn’t mean it was perfect because time has effectively made it imperfect
now.
Another
good example is the Big Bang Theory. I am well versed with it. I am also one of
the poor victims who sat in a class room with boring lectures on it. Big Bang
theory was the one that I studied in my secondary Physics class in a chapter by
name, “Universe”. The Big Bang theory is one of the widely accepted theories
that explain about the origin of our universe. According to Big Bang theory,
the universe has emerged out of nothing [Karen C. Fox, 2002]. The Big Bang
theory has proven that there is an origin for this universe and, before that
origin, there existed nothing. Many astronomers, after making exhaustive research
work have concluded the same. All of us believe in this concept, till now.
However, in the recent years, many researches are formulating hypothesis that
stand against this widely accepted Big Bang Theory. According to Big Bang, the
universe has originated 13.7 million years ago. The recent researches
Mwaniki 3
by
scientists have identified stars in the universe whose ages have been
approximated to be older than 13.7 million years [NOAO, Website].
Another research work made by the scientist Roger A Rydin, claims that the
general relativity based model proposed by Albert Einstein, which Big Bang took
as a foundation for predicting the history of universe itself was wrong[Roger
A, 2007]. This shows that the prediction made by Big Bang theory do not
hold true. The controversies on Big Bang theory are still continuing and will
continue forever. How well then to illustrate how not possible perfect research
is?
With these
two examples among many like the now infamous Newton’s ‘Third Law of Motion’,
are a worth prove that ; There is no hope for perfect research as Griffiths
had stated.
Work Cited
- Roger A Rydin, New
Developments: The Big Bang – in Controversy, University of Virginia,
2007
- Karen C. Fox, The big bang
theory: what it is, where it came from, and why it works, John Wiley
and Sons, 2002
3.
McGraw-Hill,
Dictionary of Scientific & Technical
Terms, 6E. New York: McGraw Hill Companies Inc., 2003.
4.
Slavin,
Robert E. and Nancy A. Madden, Success
for All: research and reform in elementary education. Mahwah: Laurence
Earlbaum Associates, 2001.
