Bees Successfully Buzz Through Scientific Arrangement

Taylor Hengen writer for the Scientific American is the author of the report of recent unusual bee activity, “Show me the Honey”. Many agriculturists and scientists have been observing bees acting in a very bizarre manner, becoming disoriented and on occasion not loyally returning to their hives. After extensive study this problem has been attributed to “pesticide levels in hives (that) are much higher than researchers predicted.” Hengen’s article contains several examples of key concepts discussed in Fahnestock and Secor’s, and Gross’s articles regarding the arrangement of scientific papers. Using the theory of stases, the inductive process, and Gross’s comments on layout one can better understand the successful order of the topic discussed in Hengen’s article.

Fahnestock and Secor describe the stases as “a format for the arrangement of arguments” and they consists of five logical questions including, fact, definition, value, procedure, and policy. When considered in this order it can allow one to reach specific conclusions about an argument or rhetorical piece. Emphasis on specific stases can provide clues towards the author’s attempts of audience construction. In The beginning of Hengen’s article she briefly addresses the first three stases, discussing the purpose of bees, their usual and unusual habits, and suspected cause of their behavior. The rest of the article is spent discussing various experiments and conclusions that scientists have been reaching regarding the condition of these fuzzy flyers, which would be categorized as procedure and policy stases components. Since Hengen is writing for Scientific American she can assume her audience contains a general knowledge of the first three stases, and therefore places the majority of her emphasis on the remaining two.

In addition to the use of the stases Hengen’s article also employs the “inductive process” discussed in Gross’s article. This process involves “a series of laboratory or field events leading to a general statement about natural kinds.” Before scientists were aware of the extreme amounts of pesticides in bee hives, they first observed their unusual behavior in agricultural situations, and in bee hives maintained for honey production. These “claims” were then addressed by scientists, who concluded that the bees were suffering from “Colony Collapse Disorder” most likely caused by chemical exposure. When confirmed by experiments the observed claims are then transformed into “data” and general statements about nature.

By the standards put forth by Fahnestock, Secor, and Gross Hengen’s article successfully acts as a scientific research paper, putting for claims, experimental results, and stunning conclusions. She follows the logical progression of the stases, as proposed by Fahnestock and Secor, allowing her audience to get all of the information they desire about the topic. She also uses the inductive process to take her claims and turn them into useful data that will be used by scientists to attempt to reverse the damage done to bees. Hengen successfully concludes her article on the personal note of the positive effect that each person can have on bees by growing flowering plants in their yards.