"I've Seen the Future and It's Toothless." Scientific Truth overwhelms us in the modern world. At no time in history has there been such a profusion of printed matter designed to make us aware of the data produced by our civilization. Business, industry, science, academia, and government all produce enormous amounts of information. Libraries devote a great deal of space to the storage of reference works, research materials, scholarly journals, government publications, scientific treatises as well as other kinds of referential writing. When we call ours the Information Age, we are referring in large part to the explosion in scientific writing. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS Four characteristics of scientific writing that are most obvious are: An introduction presents the thesis. A thesis is supported. Conclusions are drawn. Objectivity and accuracy are maintained. Introduction In most scientific writing an introduction presents the topic being examined and sets out the scope of the discussion. In that introduction a thesis provides the specific focus of the work. A thesis in referential writing differs from a thesis in persuasion in that the referential thesis focuses on an examination of the subject matter rather than presenting a defense of one side of the issue. A Thesis is Supported The thesis in a piece of scientific writing focuses on the subject matter. Of course, the nature of that thesis depends on the kind of subject matter presented. Facts or evidence that support the thesis are given. Conclusions A conclusion in scientific writing is one of three kinds: summative, interpretive, or speculative. In other words, the conclusion summarizes the information, interprets it, or speculates about it. Objectivity and Accuracy The presentation of the material in scientific writing is objective. The writer focuses on denotative language and uses neutral, unslanted words. Conventions of standard usage are followed and unambiguous terms are used. The facts presented in a referential paper are accurate. Accuracy is ensured by an attention to data that can be supported in some way, either by some authority (credibility of the writer) or by logic. In most cases we assume that the information presented in referential writing is accurate and that if false information is presented, it will be corrected. When a credible newspaper prints a story, we accept the accuracy of the report because of our previous dealings with that newspaper. When a scientist publishes research findings, we assume that the information reported is accurate because of our knowledge of the nature of scientific investigation. And we assume that any distorted information or inaccurate data will be quickly corrected or explained. An Example The following article, taken from U.S. News and World Report, gives a number of facts and figures that support the thesis. It illustrates the general characteristics of the referential aim. What America Eats And How Their Diet is Changing Changes in family lifestyles--and in the cost of producing some of the nation's basic foods--are altering the way Americans eat. The amount that people consume, an average of 1,463 pounds last year, has varied little over the past 20 years. However, the pattern of the American diet has altered perceptibly, as reported by the Agriculture Department's experts comparing the latest figures with those of 1960. The typical person's consumption of beef, after climbing by nearly a third during the 1960's, dropped off about 5 percent in the '70's. Consumption of poultry, meanwhile, jumped 79 percent in two decades. The reason: Mostly price, with the gap between beef and chicken widening. People are eating more fish and seafood, too, but less lamb and veal. Cheese is becoming a favorite American food, with consumption up 71 percent as more families choose it as a source of protein and a handy party food. Cheese also is used increasingly as an ingredient in fast food items such as cheeseburgers and pizzas. Over all, the Agriculture Department reports, consumption of crop products by the average American rose by 5.4 percent since 1960 to 839 pounds last year. The amount of animal products--meat, poultry and dairy foods--dropped a bit to 626 pounds per person last year. In a country blessed with an abundance of food, people still spend only 16.4 percent of their disposable income for food, less than almost anywhere else. So officials believe there is still plenty of room for change in American diets to reflect shifting lifestyles and to adjust to the blow of food price increases that are widely forecast for the year ahead. In the first paragraph of this article the author states the thesis--that changing lifestyles and the cost of food are altering the average American's diet. In this way, the scope of the topic is defined. Throughout the rest of the article, the author presents evidence relevant to the thesis. Much of this evidence is expressed as statistics and given numerical values. The language of the article is objective and neutral. The focus of each sentence is on people or the food they eat. The facts, taken from a United States Department of Agriculture survey, are attributed to experts and officials. The conclusion restates the thesis with some added speculation about the future based on the information presented. Four Kinds of Scientific Writing Scientific writing can be divided into four groups: informative, interpretive, exploratory, and parajournalistic. Informative Writing Informative writing focuses on the presentation of information, but does not attempt to do anything with that information. The objective is simply to present it to the reader. Four Characteristics of Informative writing are: Factuality is emphasized. Comprehensiveness is achieved. Surprise value is maintained. Attributions are given to facts that are not common knowledge. Factuality A fact is anything that is verifiable or that has real, demonstrable existence. If something is a fact, it can be verified. For instance, the Preface to Webster's Third New International Dictionary says that the volume contains 450,000 words. The fact, the number of words in the dictionary, is something that can be verified objectively (by counting them). Most people probably wouldn't actually count the number of words in the dictionary. They would simply accept the word of the publisher. That's the way it is with most information we deal with. As readers, we don't usually set about trying to verify everything we read. If we read something in the newspaper, we probably accept the item as factual (assuming that we believe the newspaper is a credible source of information and that the paper would print a correction if it had made an error). Our past experiences with publishing tell us which sources are credible and which are not. We are always aware that if a bit of information is a fact, it can be verified. Comprehensiveness A work is comprehensive if it contains all the information necessary to inform the reader about the topic. But just how much is enough? This is sometimes a difficult question to answer. When writing news stories, journalists make sure that they answer the questions: who? what? when? where? why? and how? The answers to those questions ensure that the basic facts of an event are reported in the story. If the topic is not an event like a news story, comprehensiveness may be determined by how the information is to be used. For instance, many dictionaries have far fewer than the 450,000 words contained in Webster's Third New International Dictionary, and yet they achieve comprehensiveness because their use is limited to looking up the most commonly used words. Another consideration that determines whether or not a work is comprehensive is the audience for whom the work is intended. For example, although the World Book Encyclopedia contains much less information than the Encyclopedia Britannica, it does achieve comprehensiveness because it's aimed at a much younger audience who presumably would not be able to use a work as comprehensive as the Encyclopedia Britannica. Surprise Value Surprise value is the extent to which reader interest is maintained. Information is surprising if the reader has an interest in the facts presented. It is surprising if the reader's response to the information is "I didn't know that." Once the information is known, the surprise value diminishes for that particular reader. But another reader, unfamiliar with the same information, may find it surprising. The arrangement of the facts in a news story usually reflects the emphasis on surprise value. The most important facts, those with the most surprise value, are given first. Less important facts follow and may be skipped over by the reader (or omitted by the editor before they are even printed). Attribution and Common Knowledge Attributions (telling where the information comes from) are not necessary if the facts are common knowledge. If the facts being presented are not common knowledge, giving the source(s) is essential. In research papers using the MLA style of documentation, complete information on the sources used is given on the last page of the paper under "Works Cited." In the body of the paper the only information that needs to be given is the exact page number from which the information is taken and any other information that is necessary (usually the name of the author) to enable the reader to find the source in the "Works Cited" list. An Example The following research paper informs us about the different kinds of wildernesses in the United States. Its factual presentation illustrates the characteristics of informative writing. It also illustrates some of the techniques of in-text documentation and some kinds of entries for "Works Cited." Kinds of Wildernesses in the United States The term wilderness brings to mind a vision of vast stretches of uninhabited land, perhaps covered by forests, mountains, or prairies, a land where wildly rushing rivers flow through a pristine environment. It is a vision that is consistent with the images of early America where Indians and mountain men and explorers roamed the untamed frontier. Indeed that vision is part of what the idea of wilderness has come to mean in modern times. Such places have become the domain of the hunter and the backpacker, those who have an interest in experiencing the world as it once was. Wilderness is defined in the Wilderness Act of 1964: A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognised as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence without permanent improvements or human habitations, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which: generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable; has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; has at least 5,000 acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value. (quoted in Smith 181) In addition, wilderness can be defined by its geographical features. Based on that way of looking at wilderness, we can divide wildernesses into five different categories: forest, mountain, desert, coastline, and swamp. Each one has its own special appeal and fascination for the lover of the outdoors. Forests and wooded areas are scattered throughout the United States. The kind of forest, obviously, is determined by the type of tree that grows in it. They range from hardwood forests to coniferous forests. In the east and midwest a mixture of hardwood and coniferous forests abound while in the southern and western areas of the country coniferous species more regularly dominate the landscape. Regardless of the type of tree or where the forested areas are located, however, people are drawn to forests and woods as places of peace and tranquility. Ralph Waldo Emerson once wrote, "Nature is the incarnation of thought. . . . In the woods we return to reason and faith" (24). Anyone who has had the experience of hiking in the woods and resting among the trees and natural surroundings will surely recognize the truth and wisdom of Emerson's words. Mountains provide very different wilderness experiences for nature lovers and in the United States mountains form three groups: the Appalachians, the Rockies, and the Sierras. The Appalachian range is located in the eastern and southeastern United States. The Rockies and the Sierras crowd the western portion of the country stretching from the southern most regions to the northern most. Mountains in all parts of the country provide climbers and backpackers with the physical challenges of mastering steep grades and the mental satisfaction of achieving their much sought after solitude. However, within the same mountain ranges terrains exist that give less strenuously motivated individuals the opportunity to breath clean mountain air, drink from clear cool streams, hike through grassy meadows and photograph some of the most spectacular views known to nature sightseers anywhere in the world. The great American Southwest holds our country's deserts and every year thousands of people come to these dry, delicately balanced habitats to see for themselves nature in perhaps her most extreme forms. U. S. deserts comprise about five percent of the land area of North America. According to Lee Schrieber they can be divided into four groups. The Great Basin Desert, covering much of Nevada and Utah, is a land of hot summers and cold winters. Sagebrush and saltbrush are the characteristic vegetation. South of the Great Basin the Mohave occupies much of southeastern California with summers that have some of the hottest temperatures on record. The Sonoran Desert, located in southern California and Arizona, has "winter and summer rainfalls, which make it the 'lushest' desert of the four." From Mexico the Chihuahuan Desert spills into the U. S. "with its spiny shrubs and cacti" (175). The desert images of the sun bleached animal bones, exotic flowering cacti, and dramatic expanses of violet brushed sunrises set the desert wildernesses apart from all other reserves. For those who go there the allure of the regions exist in their continuous mystery and demanding environments. In contrast to the deserts, coastline wildernesses include the seashores of the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific as well as the lakeshores of the Great Lakes. Viewing the coast as "a bright, dry-white world of sand," Mike Wyatt, in Backpacker magazine, reflects on coastline areas and notes that they have some of the same topographical characteristics as the desert. But, to ensure that we do not mistake his location, he also hastens to point out that a mere 50 yards from the dry, sand blown shoreline is the majestic presence of pounding surf and the lonely cries of the ever-present sea gulls (30). According to Wyatt approximately 500 miles of U. S. coastline are dedicated to our 10 national seashore wildernesses. He makes clear in his article that these areas not only provide many urban-dwelling Americans with their only opportunity to escape the artificial confines of the city, but that the reserves also give a safe haven to "countless thousands of migratory birds" and other indigenous wildlife. Because of the rich diversity of coastline ecosystems, naturalists can observe many of the world's most unusual plant and animal species quite literally, as is the case with New York's Fire Island National Seashore, within a short drive from the city streets (33). The last category of wilderness to discuss is swamps or wetlands. Swamp wilderness reserves are located in the southeast in Florida and Georgia with the Everglades National Park in Florida being perhaps the most well known swamp area in the country. Robert Colwell notes that the park embraces "jungles, swamps, and savannahs" and "is a subtropical wilderness teeming with wildlife" (44). Massive environmental efforts are currently underway to save this national treasure from the ravages of industrial pollution brought in from estuary run-off and acid rain. While millions of Americans have passed through the Everglades in tour boats and guided hunts searching for reclusive alligators and the excitement of saltwater fishing junkets, most did not realize the fragility of this fabled "river of grass." Wetlands and swamps historically have been the least understood and appreciated of our reserved wildernesses. The importance of their role in the earth's ecological cycle is only now becoming apparent to both the curious wilderness traveler and research environmentalists alike. As this brief overview of our country's various types of wilderness areas has shown, wildernesses are not only important to those of us who go there seeking solitude and natural beauty, but they are also an integral part of our nation's ecological balance and well being. Like Sigurd Olson, what Americans are now beginning to recognize about our wildernesses is that "what we are trying to conserve is not scenery as much as the human spirit itself" (quoted in Smith 179). Laura and Guy Waterman in "Backwoods Ethics" comment on the importance of wilderness experience: When we use the phrase 'the spirit of wildness,' we refer to a wide spectrum of loosely connected elements of the backcountry experience: to solitude, to difficulty and challenge, to that indefinable but intensely real feeling that grips the hiker buffeted by wind on the rocky heights, or held in fascination by the silence and greenness of deep woods. It is this spirit of wildness which civilization or man's tailor-made imitations of nature can never replace. It is irreplaceable, and to many it is essential to life spirit. (12) Those who have experienced the wilderness tell us of the importance of keeping such places wild. No matter what the differences in the kinds of wildernesses, they all have in common the ability to give to those who experience them a sense of the wonder of nature. Works Cited Colwell, Robert. Introduction to Foot Trails in America. Harrisburg, Pa.:      Stackpole Books, 1972. Emerson, Ralph Waldo. Nature. Selections from Ralph Waldo      Emerson, Ed. Stephen E. Whicher. Boston:      Houghton Mifflin, 1960. 21-56. Schrieber, Lee and the Editors of Backpacking Journal. Backpacking.      Briarcliff Manor,N. Y.: Stein and Day, 1978. Smith, Anthony. Wilderness. New York: Mayflower Books, 1978. Waterman, Guy and Laura. Backwoods Ethics. Washington, D.C.:      Stone Wall Press, 1979. Wyatt, Mike. Seaside Solitude. Backpacker, May 1991: 28-33. This research paper deals with facts only. The comprehensiveness of the paper is controlled by the categories used to present the topic. In the opening paragraphs surprise value is evident when the author tries to engage the reader's interest by showing that most people share a similar vision of the frontier. After making some historical references, the writer goes on to develop each of the five kinds of wilderness by supplying facts about each of the categories. The information is documented when it is not common knowledge. Sources are cited and attributions are given. Interpretive Writing Interpretive writing is an attempt to explain the meaning of information. The writer, through the use of logic, attempts to prove the validity of the interpretation. Examples of interpretive writing can be found in scholarly works in all the academic disciplines. Biologists explain the laws governing life on Earth; literary critics interpret novels and poems; psychologists analyze the functioning of the human mind; physicists explore the forces controlling matter and energy. No matter where we look in the academic world, scholars and scientists are trying to offer rational explanations for phenomena. Four characteristics define interpretive writing: Evidence is offered and/or a premise is presented. Conclusions are derived from the evidence. Terms are defined where needed. Deductive and/or inductive reasoning is used. Evidence and Premises Evidence (the facts presented to support a thesis) and the premises (the assumptions used to structure the analysis) form the basis of any interpretation. Before the writer can apply the elements of logical reasoning, the premises must be understood and the evidence collected. Conclusions Conclusions in interpretive writing are valid only if they are derived from the evidence and the premises that the analysis is based on. The certainty of the conclusion depends upon the kind of logic used to make the interpretation. Definitions Terms must be defined accurately because the definition of a term may affect the validity of the proof. In many academic disciplines certain words have very special meanings that are different from common definitions. Deductive and Inductive Reasoning Deductive and inductive reasoning are methods for logical reasoning. They have been discussed to some degree already in Chapter 4, but in this chapter we look at these concepts as they are used in interpretive writing. Deductive Reasoning Deductive reasoning is a purely logical process moving from the general to the specific, as reflected in the syllogism. Deduction draws particular truths from some general truth. The conclusion is implicit in the premises. The kind of syllogism examined in Chapter 4 is called a categorical syllogism because it sets up a category and shows that some individual case does or does not fit into the category. Another kind of syllogism is called the hypothetical syllogism. This kind of syllogism sets up an hypothesis, an if--then statement. The logic of the syllogism is such that if part of the if--then statement is true, then the conclusion must follow. The following example from Charles Darwin's The Origin of Species illustrates how both categorical and hypothetical syllogisms may appear in a deductive interpretation of a natural phenomenon. How will the struggle for existence . . . act in regard to variation? Can the principle of selection, which we have seen is so potent in the hands of man, apply in nature? I think we shall see that it can act most effectually. Let it be borne in mind in what an endless number of strange peculiarities our domestic productions, and, in a lesser degree, those under nature, vary; and how strong the hereditary tendency is. Under domestication, it may be truly said that the whole organization becomes in some degree plastic. Let it be borne in mind how infinitely complex and close-fitting are the mutual relations of all organic beings to each other and to their physical conditions of life. Can it, then be thought improbable, seeing that variations useful to man have undoubtedly occurred, that other variations useful in some way to each being in the great and complex battle of life, should sometimes occur in the course of thousands of generations? If such do occur, can we doubt (remembering that many more individuals are born than can possibly survive) that individuals having any advantage, however slight, over others, would have the best chance of surviving and of procreating their kind? On the other hand, we may feel sure that any variation in the least degree injurious would be rigidly destroyed. This preservation of favorable variations and the rejection of injurious variations, I call Natural Selection. Variations neither useful nor injurious would not be affected by natural selection, and would be left a fluctuating element. . . . In written prose the deductive argument may be more complex than a single syllogism. The essence of the deductive reasoning in Darwin's passage about natural selection can be seen in the following statements: Offspring vary endlessly. Beings have a close-fitting relation to their environment. Variations useful to man occur. Variations useful to each being occur in nature. More individuals are born than can survive. Individuals with an advantage have the best chances of surviving and procreating. Individuals with variations that would be injurious would be destroyed. Favorable variations are preserved. Injurious variations are rejected. A number of these assertions can be converted to syllogisms. HYPOTHETICAL SYLLOGISM Major Premise: If many variations are produced, then some will be useful. Minor Premise: Many variations are produced. Conclusion: Some are useful. CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM Major Premise: Those individuals with any advantage have a better chance of surviving. Minor Premise: Individuals with favorable variations have an advantage. Conclusion: Individuals with favorable variations have a better chance of surviving. CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM Major Premise: Variations passed to offspring are preserved. Minor Premise: Favorable variations are passed to offspring. Conclusion: Favorable variations are preserved. Inductive Reasoning Inductive reasoning moves from the specific to the general. It involves making inferences (general) based on observations (specific). A general truth becomes known through particular, empirical observations. The conclusions in inductive reasoning are not as certain as the conclusions arrived at by deductive reasoning. Inductive conclusions are at best highly probable. The advantage of induction is that it is self-correcting; that is, new evidence or additional evidence may alter the conclusions made previously. An analogy is a simple form of induction, but its application is fairly limited. The two things being compared in an analogy have to be very similar for the inference to be valid. For example, if I bought a new pair of jeans, I could reason by analogy that since the new jeans were similar in style, price, and material to an old pair I had, then the new pair should wear about as well as the old ones did. The inductive generalization is more widely applicable than analogy. A valid inference can be made if observed events are in agreement. For instance, a field biologist might make observations about the conditions necessary for a particular species of animals to live in a given location. If the presence of certain conditions (say a limited temperature range) coincided with the presence of the animal, and the absence of those conditions coincided with the absence of the animal, then the biologist might logically conclude that the condition (temperature range) determined whether the animals would live in the habitat. Furthermore, the biologist would probably record the observations as statistics, i.e. numbers of animals, temperatures, and other variables that might affect the study. For an inference to be valid, it must be generalizable. For instance, it would be a mistake to say that because some women between the ages of 25 and 30 leave their jobs to have children, all women between the ages of 25 and 30 will leave their jobs to have children. Such a generalization would not be very dependable. The following example from Charles Darwin's The Descent of Man illustrates an inductive reasoning process used in interpretive writing. Most of the more complex emotions are common to the higher animals and ourselves. Every one has seen how jealous a dog is of his master's affection, if lavished on any other creature; and I have observed the same fact with monkeys. This shews that animals not only love, but have desire to be loved. Animals manifestly feel emulation. They love approbation or praise; and a dog carrying a basket for his master exhibits in a high degree self-complacency or pride. There can, I think, be no doubt that a dog feels shame, as distinct from fear, and something very like modesty when begging too often for food. . . . Several observes have stated that monkeys certainly dislike being laughed at; and they sometimes invent imaginary offences. Reduced to the bare essentials of the evidence presented, Darwin's inductive reasoning would look something like this: Animals love and desire to be loved. Dogs show jealousy. Monkeys show jealousy. Animals feel emulation and pride. A dog carrying a basket shows self-complacency. Animals feel shame and modesty. Dogs show modesty when begging too often for food. Monkeys dislike being laughed at. Conclusion: Most of the more complex emotions are common to higher animals and ourselves. The hypothetico-deductive method is an inductive technique that involves setting up an hypothesis to explain certain facts gathered by observation and then deducing new conclusions from the hypothesis and testing those conclusions by experiment. Newton's theory of gravitation is an example of the use of this method. It is the basic method of research used in the advanced sciences. These days, polls and statistics are a favorite source for much interpretive writing. Unfortunately, the American public is generally unsophisticated in these matters and quite impressed by numbers. A truly objective, referential writer understands this and approaches the information gained from polls, surveys, and statistics with a great deal of caution. Though we can't present a detailed lesson in statistical methods here, the following illustrations might help to point out the risks involved in the blind acceptance of information from polls and surveys. A poll is a survey. Most commonly, a number of people are asked a question and the results of their answers are presented as evidence for a conclusion the writer has drawn. Most polls are based on responses from a sample, a small number of people who, the pollster assumes, represent a larger number. There are three major errors some pollsters make. First is the use of an unrepresentative sample. The people asked the question may not represent the population at large. For instance, pollsters know that women answer the phone 70% of the time. If a telephone poll has not taken that into account, the results are inaccurate. The second common problem with polls is that people are often unwilling to answer honestly. They say what they think the pollster wants to hear rather than what they truly feel or believe. They say they'll vote, but they don't. And if they don't understand something, rather than admit their ignorance, they invent a response. The third error is hardly an error at all, since the perpetrators know they are using invalid polling methods. This is the type of poll, for example, where people are asked to send or phone their vote. Since only those who are motivated respond, the results are meaningless. There are mathematical formulas that the scientists called statisticians apply to data to come up with indications and trends. When properly applied, the results of the calculations can be very helpful. Unfortunately, the cliche that there are two kinds of lies, damn lies and statistics, is often true. The use of an invalid sample or the application of specialized formulas, aimed at producing the desired results, can create statistics that are impressive on the surface, but completely inaccurate. Politicians, bureaucrats, and other public figures are fond of using the figures to produce results that support their position. U.S. News and World Report for July 11, 1988 provides the following myths which are often cited as statistically accurate and often used to promote one or another point of view. All children are above average Test scores on standardized tests for schoolchildren are up. Compared to the scores of ten years ago, the scores of today's kids are higher. This is true, but ten years ago all kids were required to take the test; today, schools can select who will and will not take the test. So the comparison is inaccurate. Crime is increasing Or is it? Since the numbers used to determine if crime is up or down from year to year depend upon the number of reported crimes, there's a strong likelihood that the reporting is up, not the crime. 3 million Americans are homeless This number came from estimates offered by agencies in 14 cities. They had no basis for their estimate except their personal experience, which involved no scientific method for determining the number. Properly conducted scientific surveys have come up with a number much lower than this. Baseball players have slumps and streaks A ballplayer's chances of getting a hit are about the same every time he gets up to bat. If he bats .250, then the odds are 1 in 4 that he'll get a hit the next time up, regardless of how "hot" he is that week. In the long run, statistical fluctuations even out. An Example The following excerpt from Charles Darwin's The Origin of Species illustrates how a scientific interpretation made from a body of evidence uses both deduction and induction. Note that Darwin uses statistics to support the inductive generalization. I am tempted to give one more instance showing how plants and animals, remote in the scale of nature, are bound together by a web of complex relations. I shall hereafter have occasion to show that the exotic Lobelia fulgens is never visited in my garden by insects, and consequently, from its peculiar structure, never sets a seed. Nearly all our orchidaceous plants absolutely require the visits of insects to remove their pollen-masses and thus to fertilise them. I find from experiments that humble-bees are almost indispensable to the fertilisation of the heartsease (Viola tricolor), for other bees do not visit this flower. I have also found that the visits of bees are necessary for the fertilisation of some kinds of clover; for instance, 20 heads of Dutch clover (Trifolium repens) yielded 2290 seeds, but 20 other heads protected from bees produced not one. Again, 100 heads of red clover (T. pratense) produced 2700 seeds, but the same number of protected heads produced not a single seed. Humble-bees alone visit red clover, as other bees cannot reach the nectar. It has been suggested that moths may fertilise the clovers; but I doubt whether they could do so in the case of the red clover, from their weight not being sufficient to depress the wind-petals. Hence we may infer as highly probable that, if the whole genus of humble-bees became extinct or very rare in England, the heartsease and red clover would become very rare, or wholly disappear. The number of humble-bees in any district depends in a great measure on the number of field-mice, which destroy their combs and nests; and Col. Newman, who has long attended to the habits of humble-bees, believes that "more than two-thirds of them are thus destroyed all over England." Now the number of mice is largely dependent as everyone knows, on the number of cats; and Col. Newman says, "Near villages and small towns I have found the nests of humble-bees more numerous than elsewhere, which I attribute to the number of cats that destroy the mice." Hence it is quite credible that the presence of a feline animal in large numbers in a district might determine, through the intervention first of mice and then of bees, the frequency of certain flowers in that district! Darwin sets out to prove his thesis that there is a great interdependence among plants and animals in nature. He supports that inference by a number of observations having to do with the habits of the various animals involved. He even set up experiments to show how pollination of certain plants is affected by insects. He also incorporates the observations of other scientists to support his theory. His inferences are derived from both observations and logical deductions. Exploratory Writing Exploratory writing is speculative. The writer engaging in the exploration may go beyond the standard interpretations. Four characteristics are present in most exploratory writing: Questions are asked. A problem is presented. Tentative conclusions are drawn. Subjective language is used. Questions Exploratory writing emphasizes discovery. This emphasis is reflected in the process of asking questions about the subject matter being considered. Problem A problem is presented that cannot be explained by available theories. This kind of thinking is the first step in scientific investigation. Tentative Conclusions Although conclusions are drawn, they are tentative, subject to change. Tentative language is used. Words like it seems and perhaps indicate that the writer is offering explanations that are based on speculation rather than incontrovertible logic. Subjective Language Exploratory writing is more subjective than other forms of referential writing. This subjectivity is reflected in the language used. First person pronouns sometimes appear and the style is probably more informal than most interpretive writing. An Example The following article from Discover magazine illustrates some of the characteristics of exploratory writing. I've Seen the Future and It's Toothless For the past 30 years anthropologist C. Loring Brace has been looking at teeth. In museums from Australia to Java to Yugoslavia he has examined human teeth that are 50,000 years old, 100,000 years old. And after three decades of research, Brace reports that the objects of his study are doing something surprising: they're shrinking. Brace measured the mesial-distal (front to back) and the buccal-lingual (side to side) tooth dimensions in skulls ranging from Neanderthals to modern humans. He found that the area of the third molar has fallen from an average of 260 square millimeters to less than 200; the average size of incisors, from 144 square millimeters to 80. But the shrinkage was not altogether gradual. For 90,000 years teeth changed slowly, getting smaller at a rate of just one percent per 2,000 years. However, at the end of the Pleistocene, approximately 10,000 years ago, they suddenly began shrinking at twice that rate. What was behind the sudden change in choppers? Brace suggests that it may have been the development of elaborate food-preparation techniques. "We're not talking about what was eaten," Brace says, "but what was done to the food before it was eaten." He believes the rate of reduction was accelerated by the introduction of earth oven cooking perhaps 100,000 years ago and the development of pottery 90,000 years later. "Pottery had an impact on the change of selective pressures that operated to maintain teeth," says Brace. "Foods could be processed to a drinkable consistency, and the amount of necessary chewing was either lessened or largely suspended. Big teeth simply became unnecessary." Could the process continue? As more and more people turn away from rugged raw meats toward tamer fare like fish and steamed vegetables, could our once impressive pearlies get even smaller? @ESSAY TEXT = "If we were to abandon technology and insist that food be prepared without food processors and other mechanical aids, the job would be thrown back to our teeth again," says Brace. "But it doesn't look like that's going to happen. At the rate things are going, there may be a time where we won't have teeth at all. It's a matter of use them or lose them." The author of the article is reporting an exploratory process directed at examining a question about the evolution of human teeth. The author poses the problem of why teeth are getting smaller and asks what they will look like in the future. The conclusions are not certain. They are based on speculation and are, consequently, tentative. Parajournalistic Writing Parajournalistic writing, including the so called New Journalism that appeared in the 1960's and 70's, tries to maintain reader interest almost to the point of losing its objectivity. Parajournalistic writing usually focuses on stories about people. Many of its techniques are similar to those used by the writer of realistic fiction. But parajournalistic writing focuses on real people. It has these four characteristics: Dramatic structure is used. Extended realistic dialogue is used. First person or omniscient point of view is used. Realistic detail is used. Dramatic Structure The writer uses a scene by scene construction. Events are reported that cast some light on the characters. Dialogue Dialogue is used to allow the reader to better understand the characters involved. The kinds of things characters say give important clues about their personalities. Point of View The writer may intrude into the narrative through a first person point of view or may appear to know what is in the mind of the characters depicted in the work through an omniscient point of view. Critics of this kind of writing say that such uses of point of view compromise the objectivity of the report. Writers who have used these techniques have defended the practice by saying that they research and interview people with just that in mind, to find out what the characters they are writing about are thinking. Realistic Detail The details the writer uses may reveal the status of the subject being investigated. For instance, a description of an item of jewelry or a mannerism may reveal quite a lot about the character. Details also help create a setting, as in literary writing. An Example James Boswell wrote an engaging biography of the life of Samuel Johnson, an eccentric and fascinating literary figure in eighteenth-century England. In this excerpt we can see how Boswell uses some of the techniques of parajournalistic writing to present Johnson to us. The Fear of Death (1769) by James Boswell When we were alone, I introduced the subject of death, and endeavored to maintain that the fear of it might be got over. I told him that David Hume said to me he was no more uneasy to think he should not be after this life than that he had not been before he began to exist. JOHNSON. "Sir, if he really thinks so, his perceptions are disturbed; he is mad. If he does not think so, he lies. He may tell you he holds his finger in the flame of a candle without feeling pain; would you believe him? When he dies, he at least gives up all he has." BOSWELL. "Foote, Sir, told me that when he was very ill he was not afraid to die." JOHNSON. "It is not true, Sir. Hold a pistol to Foote's breast, or to Hume's breast and threaten to kill them, and you'll see how they behave." BOSWELL. "But may we not fortify our mind for the approach of death?" Here I am sensible I was in the wrong, to bring before his view what he ever looked upon with horror; for although when in a celestial frame, in his "Vanity of Human Wishes," he has supposed death to be "kind nature's signal for retreat," from this state of being to "a happier seat," his thoughts upon this awful change were in general full of dismal apprehensions. His mind resembled the vast amphitheater, the coliseum at Rome. In the center stood his judgment, which, like a mighty gladiator, combated those apprehensions that, like the wild beasts of the arena, were all around in cells, ready to be let out upon him. After a conflict, he drives them back into their dens; but not killing them, they were still assailing him. To my question, whether we might not fortify our minds for the approach of death, he answered in a passion, "No, Sir, let it alone. It matters not how a man dies, but how he lives. The act of dying is not of importance; it lasts so short a time." He added, with an earnest look, "A man knows it must be so, and submits. It will do him no good to whine." I attempted to continue the conversation. He was so provoked that he said, "Give us no more of this," and was thrown into such a state of agitation that he expressed himself in a way that alarmed and distressed me; showed an impatience that I should leave him, and when I was going away, called to me sternly, "Don't let us meet tomorrow."      I went home exceedingly uneasy. All the harsh observations which I had ever heard made upon his character crowded into my mind; and I seemed to myself like the man who had put his head into the lion's mouth a great many times with perfect safety, but at last had it bit off.      Next morning I sent him a note stating that I might have been in the wrong, but it was not intentionally; he was therefore, I could not help thinking, too severe upon me. That notwithstanding our agreement not to meet that day, I would call on him in my way to the city, and stay five minutes by my watch. "You are," said I, "in my mind, since last night, surrounded with cloud and storm. Let me have a glimpse of sunshine and go about my affairs in serenity and cheerfulness."      Upon entering his study, I was glad that he was not alone, which would have made our meeting more awkward. There were with him, Mr. Steevens and Mr. Tyers, both of whom I now saw for the first time. My note had, on his own reflection, softened him, for he received me very complacently; so that I unexpectedly found myself at ease, and joined in the conversation. . . .      Johnson spoke unfavorably of a certain pretty voluminous author, saying, "He used to write anonymous books, and then other books commending those books, in which there was something of rascality."      I whispered him, "Well, Sir, you are now in good humor."      JOHNSON. "Yes, Sir." I was going to leave him, and had got as far as the staircase. He stopped me, and smiling, said, "Get you gone in"; a curious mode of inviting me to stay, which I accordingly did for some time longer.      This little incidental quarrel and reconciliation, which perhaps, I may be thought to have detailed too minutely, must be esteemed as one of many proofs which his friends had, that though he might be charged with bad humor at times, he was always a good-natured man; and I have heard Sir Joshua Reynolds, a nice and delicate observer of manners, particularly remark that when upon any occasion Johnson had been rough to any person in company, he took the first opportunity of reconciliation, by drinking to him or addressing his discourse to him; but if he found his dignified indirect overtures sullenly neglected, he was quite indifferent, and considered himself as having done all that he ought to do, and the other as now in the wrong. Boswell presents Johnson's character by letting us listen to him speak and by allowing us to see him in a dramatic situation. He presents the episode in two scenes: the quarrel and the reconciliation. The dialogue in both instances allows us to see Johnson's reactions to the conflict. Boswell uses the first person point of view. In addition, he speculates about what is in Johnson's mind. At the end of the piece Boswell sums up this aspect of Johnson's character by citing the observations of another friend. Combinations Obviously, informative elements appear in other kinds of referential writing. It is what the writer does with the information presented that distinguishes one form of scientific writing from another. Interpretive elements may appear in exploratory writing and exploration provides the basis for much scientific research. The Process of scientific writing All scientific writing starts with facts. When your aim is referential, your safest bet is to stick to a field you already know something about. Many students feel that they are not knowledgeable, but everyone has some area of expertise. We only have to search our experiences to find it. Remember that objectivity is central to scientific writing. Avoid topics which, for you, are laden with emotion or which cannot be proven one way or the other through the mechanisms of deductive or inductive logic. Such topics inevitably lead you into the use of the persuasive aim. Try these discovery questions to help you get started thinking about your topic: What facts relate to your topic? Are all the facts available to you? Can you draw any conclusions from the facts you have? Do your conclusions account for all the facts? Is there any evidence of preconceived conclusions? If you have an "answer" already in mind when you begin your logical analysis, try to set it aside. Is the conclusion supported by most of the facts?