2. The vulnerability in Braca’s argument is that although his numbers are sound, the numbers by themselves mean nothing (518). Scientists can easily manipulate the numbers in their own favor despite the fact that they “measured with the most scrupulous care and accuracy” (518). By praising Broca’s argument, the author hints Broca took his work very seriously, which strengthens his argument because Gould understands Broca’s viewpoint, but later in the article, the author proves him wrong because the victims were inconsistent in age, health, and weight.
3. In paragraph 9, Gould questions the scientific method because he explains that brain weight decreases with age and “Broca’s women were, on average, considerably older than his men (520). Also, many factors, such as, disease, weight, and height, all affect the brain mass. Gould disproves Broca’s scientific …show more content…
Gould elaborates on Broca and his colleague to show both sides in the argument, which can prevent bias and improves his credibility. In the beginning, Gould explains that Broca carefully measured brain sizes and concluded that men were superior due to their larger brain size. His other colleagues also strongly believed this false fact. Later, Gould would disprove their scientific evidence because numbers can do nothing by themselves. Instead, scientists can use numbers to strengthen their own argument, even if the numbers are incorrect. By developing Broca’s point, the author can show the readers both sides of the argument first before explaining why the scientific method was not