The Big Question in Writing That depicts A Perfect Research

Just like Griffiths, many scholars seek to propagate the idea of imperfection in research. They opine that research processes and results can never be perfect and flawless. To support their way of reasoning, they put forward various explanations and pieces of evidence. Nonetheless, these reasons are always misconstrued and cannot be sustained if subjected to empirical questioning. It is important to note that the issues in question by scholars against perfection in research are just but a few and may not make up a recognizable fraction of the elements that encompass the whole research process. At the same time, many of such reasons are partial and biased in one way or the other, just to ensure that the idea that research is imperfect is sustained and kept running.

            One of such propositions is the fact that research results have always been modified and improved on severally after their initial production and publication. In their opinion, the fact that an invention can be improved on after sometime is evidence enough to claim that the previous version was not perfect and that is what necessitates the improvement. Further, they base another argument on the effects of errors and mistakes in research. It is postulated that the research process being full of errors that are generated both systematically and a systematically, may never achieve perfection. Other than these, there are no other qualitative arguments posted against the perfection of research.

            The first reason given to claim that research is imperfect is not much sustainable, neither is the second. When carrying out research, perfection is usually the main target of the researchers. Most imperative is the detail that research focuses on a particular and specific subject. This ensures concentration of all attention, efforts and resources on one narrow field. Researchers also start by reviewing history of similarity to establish clarity in trends. Researches then engage in recurrent data collection processes that may be done again and again. The data is then analyzed keenly for outcomes . Even after the outcomes are found, evaluation and re-analysis is usually done. We therefore must start by appreciating the idea that all research outcomes are the best possible achievable results as at their time of publication. The fact that they can later be upgraded does not in any way bring in imperfection in their achievements.

            Human beings would not accept to implement any process they deem faulty in their lives. By accepting the implementation of research outcomes in life changing activities, all humans inherently appreciate the perfection in research. Furthermore, it has always been evident that improvements on research and inventions enhance performance but retain the original concept and principles of operations. The presence of the original concept is the property that makes the first discovery a perfect presentation. Besides, original writing, if you want a perfect writing service to tailor your presentation. Click here

            A clear example of such a case is the invention and evolution of electricity which has changed man’s life tremendously. Electricity was first prospected as early as the fifteenth century in Greece. In the subsequent years, Guericke was among the very first individuals to experiment the generation of electricity in Germany. There have been several research activities and inventory developments in Electricity, but it remains a basic fact that the original concepts have all survived the test of time. Benjamin Franklin managed to research on and single out the basic fact that there are various forms of electricity in lightning. Through a number of experiments dubbed as “kite” he established the principles of negative and positive electrical charges and their effect on electric flow in cases when they do not balance. Later on, the first battery was constructed by Alessandro Volta based on Guericke’s principles in 1880.

            In 1827, Georg Ohm came up with what was later to be referred to as Ohm’s law. This law stated the relationship between the length of a wire, its cross-sectional area and the current that flows through the wire. It formed the basis of electrical advancement and today’s circuits are all built on this initial model.

            Based on the above cases, it is conclusively within my belief that research is perfect and there is completely no other process as perfect as research is. Improvements on research only better our lives and increase performance and efficacy but do not in any way dispute the true perfection of research and its results.

Related posts

Leave a Comment