Part 1

1. A biological organism is a complex and sophisticated phenomenon. For the last decade, a lot of scientists have tried to find an appropriate approach to the analysis of the mentioned issue. Nevertheless, this problem was quite controversial. On the one hand, some scientists supported the idea that the analysis of the biological organism should be based on profound and complex investigation. On the other hand, some scholars tried to persuade the humanity that the best way to analyze biological organism was the scientific reduction. The latter approach has gained both positive and negative attitude.

According to Richard Lewontin, scientific reduction is the analysis of the organism on the basis of division. Apparently, he argued with the former scholars, especially Descartes, who treated the world as a clockwork mechanism. Descartes admitted that for better understanding of the whole process of the mechanism, one may investigate only its part. However, Richard Lewontin strongly disagreed with such assumption. He emphasized that scientific reduction had a negative effect on the process of investigation of the world mechanism. It is impossible to treat the world only by one part; thus, every process should be analyzed in the complexity.

Richard Lewontin stated that there should be “dichotomy between inside and outside, which disregards the role of the organism in reconstructing its environment” (Lewontin, 2000). One the one hand, organisms can adapt to the external factor in isolation. On the other hand, they have to react to the outer factor. Consequently, it is important to investigate the interrelation between the very organism and other inside and outside factors.

One may admit that Lewontin’s approach is the most rightful. However, it should not be used when analyzing the biological organisms. The reason is that every mechanism as well as biological organism should be investigated in the complex analysis. There should be profound research based on to the correlation between every part of the whole organism.

To summarize, there are a lot of approaches to the analysis of the world mechanism. Some of them are based on the complex research, while the others are grounded on the investigation of the part of the whole organism. Richard Lewontin is one of the scientists who supported the first approach and stated that every organism should be investigated in the complexity.

2. Gender has become one of the most popular issues in the contemporary world. A wide range of scientists has suggested profound approaches to the analysis of gender. Due to the fact that this phenomenon is quite complex when speaking about equality, Lewontin suggested the biological basis for better understanding of this problem.

According to Lewontin, there exist some biological determiners in the nature, namely sex and gender. In fact, these notions make the basic distinction in the world, since they determine the correlation between men and women. Apparently, men are considered to be more physically and mentally fit. Consequently, the problem of gender occurs quite frequently and is rather thorny.

The issue of equality between males and females has gained great popularity in the modern world. For the last decades, most scientists tended to think that women have less power in the world. However, due to the extreme development of modern society, the attitude toward women has dramatically changed. They became more socially adapted to the contemporary world, especially when speaking about politics, science and education affairs. Notwithstanding this fact, there still exists the assertion that women will never be both physically and mentally stronger than men. The bright example is the CBC Ideas podcast “The Gender Trap” (O’Conell, 2012), where the problem of inequality is analyzed. The main idea is that both sexes should be treated equally. Moreover, inequality is closely related to the problem of biological determiners, since investigation of gender inequality is based on them. The scientists emphasized that sex is the main phenomenon that makes a distinction in the world. Nevertheless, it is not a reason for the unequal treatment of both men and women. Thus, there should be a strict balance in the universe.

All in all, biological determiners are the main issues that make a clear distinction in the contemporary world. They can be sex and gender. That is why in order to preserve balance in the world, it is crucial to treat both men and women equally.

3. Stereotypes are a rather negative notion, since they maintain discrimination and prejudice while placing limits on human lives. Moreover, they build boundaries between people and stop them from doing what is desired. It is an absolutely true fact that gender stereotypes are most pervasive and least acknowledged. From the moment of birth, society tries to form rigid boundaries by teaching boys and girls what colors, games and toys are most suitable for them. Consequently, there is a clear distinction between men and women concerning the notion of gender. Furthermore, there is underrepresentation of women in the contemporary world, especially while speaking about science.

Nowadays, women in the field of science are highly underestimated. Most of men believe that women cannot achieve significant results in science. They emphasize that the mental ability of both sexes is different. Men initially have the ability to analyze the problem more technologically. Consequently, they can make a more scientifically proved breakthrough. Nevertheless, such assumption is highly stereotypical, since both men and women can provide profound and innovative ideas in the field of science.

Currently, there exists such term as “leaking pipe” that describes the disappearance of women in some professions. One of such professions is a scientist. The reason is that more and more women started obtaining such professions as doctor and teacher but not a scientist. One may admit that except innate abilities and maternal instincts, there is one more additional characteristic of women, namely mental abilities. In fact, they are supposed to analyze any particular issue on the basis of emotions, while men do this on the basis of deep explanations. However, such argument seems unreasonable, since women can obtain positions in the scientific field.

All in all, due to the initial influence of stereotypes, women are less powerful in the cotemporary world. There is underrepresentation concerning their position in science. Nevertheless, gender is not a basis for such conclusion, since both men and women can conduct significant investigation in the field of science.

Part 2

Nowadays, science is considered to be one of the essential institutions in the world. It is a complex notion that comprises a lot of elements, and all of them correlate with one another. Science may involve people, methods, and knowledge. In fact, each set is an integral part in the whole mechanism. Nevertheless, it is vital to understand the essence of science.

According to Richard Lewontin (1993), “Science is a social institution about which there is a great deal of misunderstanding, even among those who are a part of it”. He stated that science is based on two main components. The first one is people, while the second is a human activity. One the one hand, scientists are human beings who possess certain amount of knowledge, emotions and instincts. As a matter of fact, this influences the appearance of new scientific approaches and methods. The humans are able to achieve scientific breakthroughs and make the world better. One the other hand, science is a human activity. It can be based on different factors, namely money and time. Consequently, it influences the further development of science in general. Both components interrelate with each other aiming to create the final object. Nevertheless, it is important to understand whether science is a social institution or just a sphere of human existence.

Firstly, science can be treated as an objective notion. It provides the great variety of products for the mankind. Apparently, it has changed the life by creating useful items for the existence. Moreover, it increased the level of human satisfaction and convenience as well. Thus, it becomes possible to use technology for cooperation and coexistence.

Secondly, science is a highly influential issue. In fact, it is affected by various outer factors, namely social institutions. Being a productive activity like state and family, it has to tackle every part of the society. Richard Lewontin (19993) stated:

The problems that science deals with, the ideas that it uses in investigating those problems, even the so-called scientific results that come out of scientific investigation, are all deeply influenced by predispositions that derive from the society in which we live. (p.5)

Therefore, scientists are people who were initially born as common social individuals raised in families, in other words society. Consequently, they understand the nature due on the basis of their surroundings. That is why science is formed by society, since it is a human activity. Richard Lewontin (1993) emphasizes, “Science uses commodities and is part of the process of commodity production. Science uses money.” In fact, people earn money for their life with the help of science. That is why it is a totally true fact that science is a social institution that plays a significant role in the development of the society.

One more important issue of the analysis is the term ‘institution’ and its role in the contemporary world. According to Geoffrey M. Hodgson (2006), “Institutions are the kinds of structures that matter most in the social realm: they make up the stuff of social life.” Institutions can form thoughts, expectations and actions by applying structures on human activities. Moreover, they structure behavior by providing certain rules and regulations. Alan Wells (1970) admitted that “Social institutions form an element in a more general concept, known as social structure.” They are the basis of any developed society, since they are considered to be the strict limits of the society. Hereby, science belongs to that kind of limits. The reason is that it provides important facts and influences the society. Moreover, it suggests rules to be applied with regard to the mentioned facts.

Science as the social institution forms the mentality of the society. Moreover, it can form perceptions even concerning the understanding of gender. Based on the biological theories, both man and women are highly different. Nevertheless, their mental activity is approximately the same. Consequently, there appears the representation of the position of women in the contemporary world, especially while speaking about science. Emily Martin (1991) admits that “The stereotypes imply not only that female biological processes are less worthy that their male counterparts but also that women are less worthy than men” (p.501). However, such assumption is wrong, since both men and women have an ability to think and provide profound facts. It does not matter what gender the scientist is if they could find the solution for the fatal diseases. Thus, science correlates with each sphere of human life and influences it greatly.

To summarize, science is one of the considerable elements of the human existence. It provides enormous influence on the development of humanity. It interferes in every aspect of human life, namely family and society. Consequently, it can be treated as a social institution. The reason for this is that the scientific field comprises two main components, namely people and a human activity. Both elements influence one another, and science is a basis for this cooperation. One the one hand, scientists are people whose points and ideas were formed in the light of the society they were raised in. That is why the society affected them greatly. One other hand, a scientific activity is a process of developing something new and useful for the world. It is dependent on money and time, since scientists earn money for their living with the help of science. Thus, one may admit that science is closely connected with every aspect of human life.