You should write your document analysis on ONE of the sources listed below.
- Bontius, Jacobus, 1629. ‘Dialogues on the Preservation of Health, and the Diet Most Suitable to the Indies’, in: An Account of the Diseases, Natural History and Medicines of the East Indies. Noteman, London, 1769, 107–127. [PDF]
- Darwin, Charles. 1859. ‘Struggle for existence’, ch. 3 in On the origin of species, John Murray, London, 60–79. [PDF]
- Humboldt, Alexander von and Alexandre Bonplant, 1805. Géographie des plantes équinoxiales, in: Essai sur la géographie des plantes. Paris: Langlois. English translation in: Essay on the Geography of Plants. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 2010, 145–155. [PDF]
- Roosevelt, Theodore, 1910. Preface and ch.1 from The Wilderness Hunter. New York: Review of Reviews Company, 7–30. [PDF]
- Segerstråle, Ullica, 2000. Politics by Scientific Means and Science by Political Means: Trojan Horses in the Sociobiology Debate. Science Studies 13(1): 3–18. [PDF]
- Virgil, Eclogue IV, in: Vergil’s Eclogues, translated by Barbara Hughes Fowler, 1997, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill & London, 11–12. [PDF]
- White, Lynn. “The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis.” Science 155, no. 3767 (March 10, 1967): 1203–1207. [PDF]
For a critical evaluation of the significance of a source document you need to:
- place your source in its historical context
- underline the main arguments or message of the source
- highlight the role the source had for future developments. HISTORICAL STUDIES.
You also need to consider questions such as:
- The author(s) of the document (as well as other relevant people);
- The date of composition, further editions, “discovery,” reception, or knowledge of the document etc.;
- The circumstances/context of above;
- Intended (and possibly unintended) audience;
- Anything known of actual readership/audience;
- What assumptions does the author have and how have these assumptions influenced both the production and also the reception of the source;
- The relationship to similar documents at time of composition/publication etc.;
- Whether it is representative of a particular genre, formal discourse etc. which shapes the format and content;
- How typical/atypical of such a genre it is;
- How, by whom, and for what purpose, the document may have been used;
- What this particular document may contribute to the development of the formulation of such a genre and/or to its social currency or usage, broader cultural impact or influence etc.; and
- What was the author hoping to achieve through the production of this source. HISTORICAL STUDIES.
An article on “politics by scientific means and science by political means: Trojan Horses in the sociobiological debate” was written by Ullica Segerstrale and published in the Science Studies journal in 2000. Ullica Segerstrale is a Finish sociobiologist as well as a historian of science and a sociology professor at the Illinois Institute of Technology. Ullica Segerstrale is a renowned writer of sociology papers and articles such as ‘Nature Oracle (2013) and ‘The Battle for Science in the Sociology Debate and Beyond’ (2000) among others. Having done a lot of research in sociology and science history, Ullica Segerstrale has great skills and insight in sociology which are well demonstrated in this article. The article targets biologists, sociologists, essayists, and scientists interested in understanding human nature, socio-biology, and evolutionary psychology. Other intended audience were protagonists of metaphysical science to show the historical roots of ecological crisis as explained by White (1967). HISTORICAL STUDIES……..
or ORDER A CUSTOM PAPER