Perfection is achieved through perfection. Hence, the resources, interpretation of the research data and conclusion drawn thereafter have to be flawless. Is it possible to fulfill such a condition? Not really, from the initialization till the final result of any research, there are involvements of human brains which are anything but perfect. Plato, the great Greek Philosopher in his work The Allegory of the Cave, metamorphosed human knowledge to men confined in a dark cave where the only source of light was a bleak ray coming from a fire lit outside through an aperture. The light fell on a wall resulting in shadowy images formed by people passing in front of the fire. Prisoners took the images to be real but truth was far from those virtual silhouettes (Steven Kreis, 2004). Hence, perception plays a major role in intellectual development and understanding, it could be based on truth or illusion.
In order to elaborate this point, let’s refer to Sir Isaac Newton’s theories of motion which laid the foundation of Classical mechanics. He came out with the research paper Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica in the year 1687. The three laws of Motion together with law of Gravity and mathematical Calculus had answers for a string of universal material phenomena, but lacked in providing consciousness connections to them. He dealt every happening in the light of its material existential parameters without giving head to the awareness aspect. Thus, leading to objectification of each particle. Even such a great scientist and mathematician could not reason out consciousness, hence giving a lopsided view of all cosmic occurrences. Later, Max Planck and other physicists like Werner Heisenberg, Neils Bohr, De Broglie and Schrodinger came out with Quantum mechanics theories. A constituent theory of quantum mechanics named Copenhagen interpretation was founded by Heisenberg and Neils Bohr in 1930. Through superposition, quantum entanglement and wave function collapse conditions explained under Copenhagen interpretation, satisfactory explanation for the material awareness or mind consciousness could be obtained, by linking the observer and the observed in the system. (Werner Heisenberg, 1930). Through the latter developments, the world received a much insightful set of scientific principles regarding the anomalies and mysteries pertaining to the perceived as well as non-perceived characteristics of the entire existence. Hence, founders of quantum physics could penetrate more into the laws governing our lives than that of classical mechanics.
Further, perfection can be attained only in a static environment, where the constituent variables or parameters remain frozen. Change being an inevitable part of this world, another requirement for a perfect research remains unachievable. One such research, supporting this fact, is in the field of skin cancer. Exposure to ultraviolet rays of sunlight causes mutation of skin cells DNA thus, increasing chances of development of this disease by manifolds. Ozone layer provides protection from these harmful rays, but is getting depleted due to emission of CFC gases. Hence, from the time ozone layer depletion is reported in 1985, dermal cancer occurrences have increased immensely and the count is accelerating (Rene Dubos, 2004). Now, the diameter of ozone hole affects the amount of ultraviolet rays reaching the earth, which in turn acts as a determinant for the number of skin cancer cases. Finally, the ozone layer depletion is solely affected by the quantity of CFC in our environment. So, statistics of skin cancer is dependent on various parameters that are ever changing, making the end result dangle in approximation.
Through the discussion and references gone by, it can be concluded that perfection does not exist anywhere. The conclusions drawn from and by flawed sources would lead to nothing more than an imperfect piece of work. Therefore, I agree to the topic of essay “There is no hope of doing perfect research”.