This week we attended a lecture titled “What Would Convince You?” which was an entertaining look at critical thinking and the scientific method.
Different methods of coming to a personal truth were covered, such as Mysticism, Theism, Rationalism, Hermeneutics, Scepticism and Empiricism. After some thought, I’ve come to the conclusion that my way of coming to a truth is a concoction of scepticism and empiricism, with perhaps a (rapidly fading) dash of mysticism. There was, however, a way of thinking covered that I had little previous understanding of – Rationalism. I found Plato’s way of thinking extremely interesting, even though I find some of it absurd. I have spent a little too long reading up on him since!
One question that was posed at the end of the lecture was “What will be the standard of proof in my inner Court of Truth?”. This caught me off guard at first, as I hadn’t really been critical of my thought process in everyday situations. I’ve always been a sceptic, but I’ve started to realise how many things I say and do without question, and as a result I’ve become a bit of a Wikipedia fiend!
In conclusion, I can safely say the first lecture has peaked my interest in the subject..
This week external students had the opportunity to study herd immunity, and perform virtualized experiments on disease outbreak.
Before studying Herd Immunity, I had little to no knowledge of the topic. It was interesting to discover the actual applicable meaning of an ‘epidemic’, and the fact that this area is so topical fuelled my desire to learn more. Using a computer model to gauge the result of outbreaks was extremely engaging and I think it could be a powerful tool to garner student interest.
I think the teaching staff intentionally chose this topic for the above reasons, for its relevance in current events and its engaging format.
Another word that I had often heard but never understood is ‘virulence’, which is the extent to which an agent...