This article brings out the importance of Tyson’s work in the scientific community. It is almost the opposite of the article criticizing his work because it praises him for the work he does in the field. This makes me wonder how he is such a figure for scientific exploration and how he got there. I’m curious about the racial biases he has to endure while doing this job at such a high level. I was instantly hooked because of the positivity, and the praise he got for doing his job so well at many different levels. He basically does science for everyone, and he is a science popularizer that mostly everyone enjoys.
The article contains an interview of a couple who wrote a book together— the husband is a astrophysicist, and the wife is a pathologist. They intertwined the field of pathology and the field of astrophysics in their writing. I’m curious about this topic because it shows how our bodily processes came from one star exploding to create our world. This obviously took a long time to happen, but the two argue that, “Our bodies are made of remnants of stars and massive explosions in the galaxies” very well. They relate diseases and many other daily things with the far-seeming explosion and stardust that created and continues to create our current world. I could use two different topics and intertwine the two in my writing.
This article criticizes the work of Neil deGrasse Tyson, but it is very interesting. The author questions the actual formed ideas of Tyson, and his push for kids to explore more. He says that Tyson does not much more than recite interesting facts already proven. I think the article is interesting because I personally do not believe in it, but it is a good negative argument. I could search for more negative articles and how they are written if I include lots of negativity in my writing. A sentence I could possibly use is, “If you’ve ever actually listened to Tyson speak, his overall theme is ‘science is good and cool.’” He criticizes Tyson’s work not pushing young people forward in their studies which works very well.
This interview on many intelligent and advanced kids explains how they got influenced, just as Neil deGrasse Tyson did. One girl in the video is an astrophysicist that started at a very young age. She basically took the exact route Tyson did with a mentor. Based on this article, I could write about the influences of mentors or outside forces that cause people to love and enjoy one topic so early in life. It makes me wonder how one can be influenced this throughly and love one field of study. Since I am writing about the effects of “Cosmos”, I definitely will use this to show the effects of the field on people.
This animation by Kerzgesagt explains the principle of optimistic nihilism. The principle basically says that we do not matter to this universe at all, and we cannot understand it. Because of this, the video provides a positive outlook on life because we can do whatever we feel like doing, and in the end, nothing will matter. I’m curious about this topic because it can create optimism in not mattering; we can be the gods of our own lives and do as we want. For me, this helps to find motivation in life because we can fulfill our own purpose. If we make others happy or help mankind, that is even better because we not only make ourselves feel good but others. This interests me because it means life all depends on you and what you create out of it. I could use this in my writing in how the universe helps to create a positive outlook for people.
This TedEd talk by Jim Holt discusses our existence as a whole. I was instantly hooked by the talk because he discusses various viewpoints about our existence. Holt places us in a universe where we are mediocre, nothing is perfect, but it does matter. I could use this in my writing because of the conflicting viewpoints. The good mentor texts include other viewpoints seen around the world. I may incorporate other viewpoints into my writing to better it.
In this video, Tyson has a short comment on the most astonishing fact in the universe which is very interesting to me. He says that “the level of connectivity” he has with the universe is the best thing to him. I really enjoy how Tyson comments on this because he feels that as we essentially do not matter, the level of connection we have with our universe does matter because we were created by it. I could use his words in my writing when I write about the optimistic view of the universe. This makes me wonder about the happiness we still have as humans when we do not matter to our universe. We are such a small part in a vast expanse, yet we still have happiness and love for it because we were created by it.
In this article, the author critiques the modern interpretation of “Cosmos” by Carl Sagan before the show has been made. The author feels as if the producers are so obsessed with sticking to Sagan’s theory that Tyson’s wit is diminished. He also comments on how Seth Macfarlane produces this show which is totally different from a comedy-like show. I like the style of writing in that it critiques but also gives praise to the show. I could use this in my writing by shedding negative and positive light on “Cosmos” to create a good argument. The negative and positive sides of the argument are well-done which also makes me wonder how to do this well.
This article expands on the effects of astrophysics on young adults. A famous public scientist, Carl Sagan, helped to bring the passion Neil deGrasse Tyson had for science into the world. I could use this article to expose the effects of interests in young adults. The one meeting the two had together brought out a further passion in the field for Tyson, and I may mimic similar effects on young adults in this field of study in my writing. This makes me wonder how in one small instance of influence, a world of opportunity is brought out to people. I will continue to read about the changing interests in young people that create a passion for them.
Neil deGrasse Tyson creates a compelling argument on the afterlife in an interview with Larry King. Tyson argues that we as humans return to a state of unconsciousness and decaying because of biological processes when we die. His argument interests me because he contradicts many other belief systems and says we do not live after we die. Because of this, he tries to live his life to the full potential, and he does not fear death but the thought of not completing his life purpose. This makes me wonder how Tyson’s work creates a positive outlook on not mattering in the universe. I could use this text to explain how this causes some people think of life as a thing to fulfill with their own purpose.