Certificate

This is to certify that UTTKARSH of class XII-B has

completed the project on the below mentioned topic under
the guidance of MRS. SHALLU KHANNA during the year
2022-23 .

Signature
 Acknowledgement
In the completion of this project successfully many people
have best owned upon me their blessings and the heart
pledged support , this time I am utilizing this to thank all the
people who have been concerned with the project .

I would like to thank my teacher MRS. SHALLU KAHANNA

whose valuable guidance have been very helpful. Secondly I
would like to thank my classmates who provided me support
when needed .
 INDEX
 Introduction
 Supporting Science
 Meeting social needs
 What had science done?
 Nature of science
 Characteristics of nature of science
 Science as a social enterprise
 Scientific and attitude
 Bibliography
 INTRODUCTION
Societies have changed over time, and consequently, so
has science. For example, during the first half of the 20th
century, when the world was enmeshed in war, governments
made funds available for scientists to pursue research with
wartime applications — and so science progressed in that
direction, unlocking the mysteries of nuclear energy. At other
times, market forces have led to scientific advances. For
example, modern corporations looking for income through
medical treatment, drug production, and agriculture, have
increasingly devoted resources to biotechnology research,
yielding breakthroughs in genomic sequencing and genetic
engineering. And on the flipside, modern foundations
funded by the financial success of individuals may invest
their money in ventures that they deem to be socially
responsible, encouraging research on topics like renewable
energy technologies. Science is not static; it changes over
time, reflecting shifts in the larger societies in which it is
embedded .

Supporting Science
Some science can be done without much money at all. You
can make careful observations of the sparrows in your
backyard and do real scientific research on a shoestring , but
many research topics in science are not so cheaply addressed.

For example , scientists are eagerly awaiting the answer to

the question in particle physics , which they hope will some
from a multi – billion dollar particle accelerator scheduled to
be operational in 2009 . Of course , most scientific research
doesn’t cot a billion dollar – but neither is it free. Science can
be expensive. There are salaries to be bankrolled, lab
equipment to be bought, workspace to be paid for, and field
research to be financed. Without funding, science as a whole
simply can't progress, and that funding ultimately comes
from the societies that will reap its benefits. Hence, those
societies help determine how their money is spent. For
example, a society that largely approves of stem cell research
will encourage government support, stimulating advances in
the field. However, a society that largely disapproves of stem
cell research is unlikely to support politicians who provide
funding for that research. In the latter situation, less research
on stem cells will be done, and that society is unlikely to
become a leader in the field. Funding influences the path of
science by encouraging research on some topics and pointing
away from others. That influence may be indirect, such as
when political priorities shape the funding programs of
government funding agencies (like the National Institutes of
Health or the National Science Foundation). Or that
influence may be more direct, such as when individuals or
private foundations provide donations to support research
on particular topics, like breast cancer — or when an
individual or institution offers a monetary prize for solving a
particular scientific problem, such as the 25-million-dollar
prize offered in 2007 for the invention of a viable technique
for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. As that
example demonstrates, funding can shape the course of
science by prodding it in particular directions — but
ultimately, funding cannot change the scientific conclusions
reached by that research.
 Meeting social needs
Science responds to the needs and interests of the societies in
which it takes place. A topic that meets a societal need or
promises to garner the attention of society is often more likely
to be picked up as a research topic than an obscure question
with little prospect for a larger impact. For example, over the
last 15 years, science has responded to the HIV/AIDS
epidemic with a massive research effort. This research has
addressed HIV in particular, but has also increased our
understanding of viral infections in general. Society's desire
to slow the spread of HIV and develop effective vaccines and
treatments has focused scientific research, which improves
our understandings of the immune system and how it
interacts with viruses, drugs, and secondary infections.
Science is done by people, and those people are often
sensitive to the needs and interests of the world around
them, whether the desired impact is more altruistic, more
economic, or a combination of the two, as demonstrated in
the example below.

What had science done?

Plenty. If you think science doesn't matter much to you,
think again. Science affects us all, every day of the year, from
the moment we wake up, all day long, and through the night.
Your digital alarm clock, the weather report, the asphalt you
drive on, the bus you ride in, your decision to eat a baked
potato instead of fries, your cell phone, the antibiotics that
treat your sore throat, the clean water that comes from your
faucet, and the light that you turn off at the end of the day
have all been brought to you courtesy of science. The modern
world would not be modern at all without the
understandings and technology enabled by science. To make
it clear how deeply science is interwoven with our lives, just
try imagining a day without scientific progress. Just for
starters, without modern science, there would be

 no way to use electricity- From Ben Franklin's studies of

static and lightning in the 1700s, to Alessandro Volta's
first battery, to the key discovery of the relationship
between electricity and magnetism, science has steadily
built up our understanding of electricity, which today
carries our voices over telephone lines, brings
entertainment to our televisions, and keeps the lights on
 No plastic-. The first completely synthetic plastic was
made by a chemist in the early 1900s, and since then,
chemistry has developed a wide variety of plastics suited
for all sorts of jobs, from blocking bullets to making
slicker dental floss
 no modern agriculture-. Science has transformed the
way we eat today. In the 1940s, biologists began
developing high-yield varieties of corn, wheat, and rice,
which, when paired with new fertilizers and pesticides
developed by chemists, dramatically increased the
amount of food that could be harvested from a single
field, ushering in the Green Revolution. These science-
based technologies triggered striking changes in
agriculture, massively increasing the amount of food
available to feed the world and simultaneously
 transforming the economic structure of agricultural
practices.
 no modern medicine-. In the late 1700s, Edward Jenner
first convincingly showed that vaccination worked. In the
1800s, scientists and doctors established the theory that
many diseases are caused by germs. And in the 1920s, a
biologist discovered the first antibiotic. From the
eradication of smallpox, to the prevention of nutritional
deficiencies, to successful treatments for once deadly
infections, the impact of modern medicine on global
health has been powerful. In fact, without science, many
people alive today would have instead died of diseases
that are now easily treated.

Scientific knowledge can improve the quality of life at many

different levels — from the routine workings of our everyday
lives to global issues. Science informs public policy and
personal decisions on energy, conservation, agriculture,
health, transportation, communication, defense, economics,
leisure, and exploration. It's almost impossible to overstate
how many aspects of modern life are impacted by scientific
knowledge.

Nature of science
When trying to describe the nature of science, it can be
useful to think of science as a culture in just the same way
that we think of the cultural worlds of art and music. We
need to understand and talk art or music when we enter
these worlds. In the same way, we need to be able to
understand and talk science.

Science educator and researcher Derek Hodson compares

teaching science to the way an anthropologist teaches about
another culture. Both can be seen as involving a tribe of
people with particular knowledge, a certain language,
customs, practices, traditions, attitudes and values.

When we describe the nature of science, we are considering

the special characteristics, values, and assumptions that
scientific knowledge is based on and how scientific
knowledge is developed.

Characteristics of the
nature of science
Science education has defined tenets (characteristics) of the
nature of science that are understandable by students and
important for all citizens to know. William McComas and
Joanne Olson analysed recent science education curriculum
documents worldwide and identified 14 statements about the
nature of science that are common to most curricula:

 Science is an attempt to explain natural phenomena.

 People from all cultures contribute to science.
 Scientific knowledge, while durable, has
a tentative character.
 Scientific knowledge relies heavily, but not entirely, on
observation, experimental evidence, rational arguments
and scepticism.
 There is no one way to do science – therefore, there is no
universal step-by-step scientific method
 New knowledge must be reported clearly and openly.
 Scientists require accurate record-keeping, peer
review and reproducibility.
 Observations are theory laden.
  Scientists are creative.
 Over the centuries, science builds in both an
evolutionary and a revolutionary way.
 Science is part of social and cultural traditions.
 Science and technology impact each other.
 Scientific ideas are affected by the social and historical
setting.
 Laws and theories serve different roles in science –
therefore, students should note that theories do not
become laws even with additional evidence.

Science as a social
enterprise
Social enterprise...is best explored through culture. Beyond a
bunch of nerdy guys, sitting around poking at reality and
fantastic voyages, they are both nerdy and fun, and with a
gratuitous sense of comoradarie and brotherhood. And like
anything else, there is exclusivity, often out of being polite
and observant. In the case of being peer reviewed, a qualified
person with similar interests are chosen who can understand
you and possibly heard of you. We use a social science as an
non-official "soft" science, that is satisfying and real, if we
know it.

Of course not every scientist knows sociology. The scientific

method--a potential breakthrough often fails the math or the
adherence to parameters, what set-up must be strictly
maintained through all trials of an experiment, and is
reproducible. Failure may seem immanent, when an answer
does not confirm. Answers to experiment CAN mean either
"wrong" or " not even wrong". That is to suggest, that if too
many anomalies exist anywhere in the given set-up, it is less
potential to the theory or result already extant.

Traditional philosophy of science is relentlessly
individualistic. It focuses on individual agents and on the
conditions they should satisfy if their beliefs are to be
properly supported. On the face of it, this is a curious
limitation, for it is evident that contemporary science (and
most science of the past) is a social activity. Scientists rely
on each other for results, samples, techniques, and many
other things. Their interactions are often cooperative,
sometimes competitive. Moreover, in the societies in which
most scientific research is carried out, the coordinated
work of science is embedded in a web of social relations
that links laboratories to government agencies, to
 educational institutions, and to groups of citizens. Can
philosophy of science simply ignore this social setting?

Scientific and attitude

To understand the concept of scientific attitudes, it is
necessary to take into recognition some of the definitions put
forwarded by some experts. In view of some experts, scientific
attitudes can best be defined as open mindness or a desire
for getting or gaining accurate kind of knowledge.

It also implies gaining confidence in procedures for seeking

knowledge and the expectations that by making use of
verified knowledge, solutions of all the problems will be find
out. Likewise, some experts are of the view that kind of
attitudes which are free from all kinds of biases, prejudices
and superstitions are known as scientific attitudes. Open-
mindness, intellectual honesty and critical mindness are
considered to be some of the main features of such kind of
attitudes.

Thus it can be said that a person who possess scientific

attitudes have the natural tendency to look for the basic
cause which led to development of the situation. Such person
will not rely on other people’s believes and knowledge. No
consideration will be paid by such person to the superstitious
views and to the thing like fate or luck.

Such person is curious concerning the things he observes. He

does not get satisfied only by witnessing the happening, but
tries to find out the reason for the happening. He will try to
get answer of various questions get arising in his mind. Such
a person has an open mind, because of which he will try to
collect opinions of other persons and will attempt to relate
their opinions with his own views. Such person must possess
the view that truth never gets changed, however, as soon as
he gains better understanding of that truth, his ideas of what
is true will get changed.
 Bibliography
 www.britannica.com
 www.preservearticles.com
 undsci.berkeley.edu
 www.sciencelearn.org.nz
 www.wikipedia.com
 www.quora.com