CLA2810 Florida State University Aristotles Buoyancy Experiment Homework


Question Description

In our course, we learned that what we call ‘science’ today was known as ‘philosophy’ in antiquity. To be precise, the science which we call ‘physics’ was known to the ancients as phusiologia, meaning ‘the study of nature.’ Aristotle included physics as one of the three theoretical sciences, together with mathematics and theology. While geography studies the surface of the earth and astronomy studies the heavens, physics studies the origin, structure, and underlying forces of the natural world.

In our course, we also learned that water has been considered one of the primary elements of the natural world from the Mesopotamian cosmogonical myth to the Presocratics. Thales postulated water to be in the foundation (archē) of the universe and Heraclitus allegedly said that we can never step in the same water twice. Aristotle accepted Empedocles’ theory of the ‘four primary elements’ and paid special attention to earth and water. But he does not engage only in contemplative speculation. In his treatise On Plants, he does the best he can to explain how soil is made and how soil and water interact.

In this assignment, you will engage with the experiment stage of the scientific method. Your task is to replicate Aristotle’s experiment about buoyancy and, based on your result, evaluate whether he conducted the experiment correctly and what future lines of research he could have pursued.

Assignment Prompt

Format of a Lab Report

The format of the lab report as a scientific piece of literature is different from the scientific essays evaluating theories and data. It includes the following elements, organized in this order:

  • A title and section headings for each one of the elements below
  • Introduction: State the objective of the experiment and provide enough background of the subject for the reader to understand the context of your report; here is the place for you to introduce Aristotle’s scientific achievement as presented in Lindberg; then clearly formulate the question your experiment will attempt to answer.
  • Materials & Methods: List all materials you used and describe precisely the steps in which you conducted the experiment. Your description has to be as precise as to allow the reader to duplicate the experiment.
  • Results: Present and analyze the data collected in your experiment.
  • Discussion: Explain whether your results answer the question you formulated in the introduction; Interpret your results according to the modern understanding of buoyancy; outline possible future experiments that might further clarify the subject.

Assignment Rubrics

Your assignment should contain the following elements and will be graded based on how well your assignment represents them:

  • Clear introduction.
  • Clearly formulated experiment question?
    • Do you ask a question which you will test in your experiment?
  • Clear use of assigned reading materials (quotes, in-line references, paraphrases, etc.), followed by source attribution in parentheses.
    • Do you provide a well-documented outline of your experiment?
  • Clear organization of your experiment results.
  • Critical Thinking:
    • Do you evaluate your results according to the modern understanding of buoyancy?
    • If you think Aristotle did or did not conduct the experiment correctly, explain why?
  • Originality:
    • Does your assignment reflect your own original thoughts and words?
    • Do you avoid over-relying on quotes or paraphrases of others’ words? (You should not, under any circumstances, present others’ ideas or words as your own.)
    • Does your assignment make observations which are obvious?
    • Does your assignment have an “Aha” moment of discovery which you have made while working on it. A suitable place for such an idea is the conclusion.
  • Grammar & Style
    • Is your writing grammatically correct and fluent?
    • Have you demonstrated an adequate review (i.e. proofreading) of your writing, as indicated by proper punctuation, proper spelling, etc.?
    • Have you avoided repetitions such as expressing the same thought in a number of different ways?
  • Word Count
    • Have you written your assignment succinctly and concisely?
    • Is your assignment between 600–700 words in length? Your assignment should naturally end within this range (i.e. do not leave an awkward ending to your essay just because you have reached the upper limit or because you just surpassed the minimum limit).
    • Do you include a word count at the end of your essay?
  • Bibliography
    • Do you list all sources you have used for your essay?
    • A bibliography of the sources you used (such as assigned readings, articles, any other print or online sources used, images, maps, etc).

Note: In-text citations and bibliography should be formatted according to the Chicago Manual of Style. To see examples, go to our Canvas course site (Links to an external site.) and follow the following links: Library Tools Þ Citation Management Þ Our Citation Þ Research Guide Þ Chicago.

Material link:

Text book:

• David C. Lindberg, The Beginnings of West- ern Science: the European Scienti c Tradition in Philosophical, Religious, and Institutional Context, 600 b.c. to a.d. 1450, 2nd Edition, Chicago, 2007

  • - ISBN-13: 978-0-226-48205-7
  • - ISBN-10: 0-226-48205-7

Tutor Answer

School: Cornell University



Buoyancy Theory Based on Aristotle Arguments
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

Buoyancy Theory Based on Aristotle Arguments
Theory of science is a sub-field of reasoning worried about the establishments, techniques,
and ramifications of science. The focal inquiries of this investigation concern what qualifies as
science, the unwavering quality of logical hypotheses, and a definitive motivation behind science.
This control covers with transcendentalism, metaphysics, and epistemology, for instance, when it
investigates the connection among science and truth (Lindberg, 2008). Reasoning of science
centers on otherworldly, epistemic and semantic parts of science. Moral issues, for example,
bioethics and logical wrongdoing are frequently viewed as morals or science contemplates as
opposed to theory of science. There is no agreement among rationalists about a considerable lot of
the focal issues worried about the way of thinking of science, including whether science can
uncover reality with regards to undetectable things and whether logical thinking can...

flag Report DMCA

Top quality work from this tutor! I’ll be back!

It’s my second time using SP and the work has been great back to back :) The one and only resource on the Interwebs for the work that needs to be done!

Thanks, good work

Similar Questions
Related Tags

Brown University

1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology

2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University

982 Tutors

Columbia University

1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University

2113 Tutors

Emory University

2279 Tutors

Harvard University

599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2319 Tutors

New York University

1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University

1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University

2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University

932 Tutors

Princeton University

1211 Tutors

Stanford University

983 Tutors

University of California

1282 Tutors

Oxford University

123 Tutors

Yale University

2325 Tutors