The Making of a Scientist
- V. S. Ramachandran
About the Author
V. S. Ramachandran begins with one of the most important elements to be a scientist which is a sense of curiosity and wonder. He also states that one has to be ready to tolerate physical discomfort. For him, science is a love affair with nature but one has to be on the lap of nature to establish romantic love.
To be near nature is certainly an adventurous task, one needs to face many difficulties while playing with nature. Ramachandran believes that stimuli and inspiration also play a vital role to change a person into a scientist. He himself had been inspired by his teachers, lecturers in his school and college days. In his family, his uncle had motivated him to be a scientist; his mother had brought seashells so that he could research them. He had got a chemistry lab opened under his staircase. His father had bought a microscope for him.
Hence, one should be motivating family and environment to be a scientist who is further supported when he claims that the Victorian era was the encouraging time that had produced the scientists like Darwin and Huxley. Ramachandran believed that one has to isolate from the mundane world and be studious about those dead scientists treating them as living people.
Similarly, Ramachandran believes that a scientist should have an interest in different aspects of the earth. He himself had studied in different fields like civilization; he loved anthropology, the survival strategy taken by a plant etc. Hence, he believed that the intense zeal of doing research and the ability to find a sense of fun is another quality of a scientist. Undoubtedly, a scientist should feel a sense of fascination while performing any kind of experiment.
In short, exploration and stimuli are interrelated to each other. The first and foremost requirement to be a scientist is curiosity and enthusiasm. S/he must have a desire to know more even if an end ends. One should be ready to get and face the difficulties. Curiosity is something that does not make someone comfortable. Certain other qualities are required to be a scientist: They are as follows: innate traits, associations, the family can stimulate an individual to be a scientist.
Summary of the Essay: The Making of a Scientist
‘The Making of a Scientist is an essay written by V.S. Ramachandran. It is an opinionated and descriptive essay based on his own experiences. The essay describes the writer’s opinion of how a scientist can be mustered. The essay focuses on how a scientist can be made by dealing with the most significant requirements for it.
Scientists are eccentric people than others. So, their interests, hobbies, the environment should be something extra than those for normal ones. To be a scientist one should be obsessively, passionately and pathologically curious. As science is a subject of creations, freedom and independence, people should understand that the absence of anyone results in the failure of innovations.
The writer explains the nature and behaviour of a scientist. He clarifies how a scientist is. He, from his own life experiences, also vividly tells us about the life of a scientist to some extent.
In my context, this essay has revitalized my belief in curiosity. I joined an engineering course to play with my curiosity. But, the mugging system of Kathmandu University had discouraged me. But after this essay, I feel like still trust passion and instincts.
There is very little to interpret than to assimilate in The Making of a Scientist. Elucidate.
There is very little to interpret than to assimilate in The Making of a Scientist. Interpretation of the making of scientists is very less. First, in the sense, it is an argumentative essay an essay needn’t be interpreted since it is already clarifying something. In this case, the importance of family background, school and friends, teachers, colleagues and self-interest in making the science is being clarified by the writer. Hence the essay is argumentative and has interpreted the above concept.
But there are many aspects to be assimilated. The text is written for learning how to turn a child into a great scientist. Interpretation has no meaning without assimilation but later is always must be more than former. We need to have a clear concept of how to perform certain things and must learn to apply them but the application is always higher than the theory. Here interpretation is understanding theory while assimilation is applying the theory by learning. Hence every theory has numerous applications.
As in the essay, the writer makes the argument that to be a scientist one need to be curious obsessively, passionately, almost pathologically from childhood. Then the parents of that child must boost him/her by giving proper attention on proper way. When the child grows young he must be able to maintain the circle of a friend who is curious obsessively, passionately, almost pathologically like him. He must have good relationships with the teachers and must perform scientific experiments regularly to understand theories. When he starts his career he must make various researches in the field of interest. As done by the Ramachandran in his life.
The above paragraph is the interpretation about how to make the scientist. But it can be assimilated in many ways. Learning or assimilating is a multidimensional factor since it can be learned in many different ways. As in the essay, we can assimilate: There are many scientists who were curious obsessively, passionately, almost pathologically from childhood. For example scientists like Darwin, Newton etc. wouldn’t be scientists without curiosity. In our society, we can see that children who were given good assistant regarding their curiously flourish much in youth in the same field. The same fact is applicable for Ramachandran.
Also, the writer explained Science flourishes best in an atmosphere of complete freedom and financial independence. He interprets this by giving the example of the Victorian time when science flourishes much under the sound financial and complete freedom. Many discoveries were made at that time. This also shows that the interpretation of the above statement can be assimilated in many ways as given below: This can be the answer why in America science is very developed than that in Nepal and any other developing country.
We Nepalese can learn facts and establish peace and prosperity to provide a sound environment for scientists, economists, and workers etc to work freely. This also explains why some students are bad at studying than others simply because the former might be living in poverty and violence while later in prosperity and peace. Hence, in the making of the scientist, the understanding is much less than its application.