Making science public: data-sharing, dissemination and public engagement with science

Barbara — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 16:39:20 +0000

Journals and peer-reviewed publications are still the most widely used channels through which research is disseminated within the scientific community and to a broader audience. However, social media is increasingly challenging the supremacy of editors, reviewers and science communicators. Blogging about science has become a new way of engaging “the public” directly with researchers whilst researchers are increasingly using blogs within their own academic communities for peer-review purposes. Panellists will give their perspective on how social media has changed the nature of the scientific debate amongst scientists, and how it has impacted on engagement with the public understanding of science. So, if social media offers the opportunity of unmediated exchange between scientists and the public, is this the last nail in the coffin of science journalism? Do blogs have the potential to become a respected medium for academic exchange?

Charismatic Authority – betting on the jockey and not the horse

Barbara — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:30:35 +0000

In the popular mind, science is often represented as a profoundly cold and impersonal affair, strictly governed by method, reason and impartiality. It is carried by the notion that the scientific endeavour is propelled by the anonymous knowledge-worker who carries out experiments under strictly controlled conditions behind closed doors. Steven Shapin, eminent historian and sociologist of science, explored these elements in a lecture at the Said Business School, based on his latest book Scientific Life: A Moral History of a Late Modern Vocation. He pointed out that before the twentieth century, scientific practitioners mostly used to be amateurs who —however competent— did science for love, a romantic vocation… driven by the desire to read “God’s book of Nature”. Yet, the secularization of Nature combined with the rise of the “scientific method” in the 19th century contributed to the erosion of science as a noble pursuit. The mid-20th century saw the emergence of large-scale government and industry funded science which further contributed to its demystification. Doing research became more and more a “job” like any other.

Although the majority of scientists today are employed by industry or government, Shapin clearly distinguished between academic and industry sponsored science. He argued that despite the growing anonymity of the individual scientist, certain notions of moral superiority still persist. Forexample, today, media and cultural commentators often bestow integrity and moral clout on the scientific community, mythologising institutions such as CalTech, MIT and Oxford. He also highlighted that in some areas of contemporary science and high tech innovation, charismatic authority plays a much bigger role today than in the past – think Susan Greenfield, Richard Dawkins, Kay Davies and Chris Evans. The key to understanding this apparent paradox is the uncertain outcome of these usually high-risk areas of enquiry. If you are pushing boundaries and venture into unknown territory, the only option is to trust the visionary individual rather than the proposed technology. Hence, you bet on the jockey not the horse.

Steven Shapin, The Scientific Life: A Moral History of a Late Modern Vocation, University of Chicago Press 2008.

The Oxford Centre for Entrepreneurship and Innovation » scientists

Making science public: data-sharing, dissemination and public engagement with science

Charismatic Authority – betting on the jockey and not the horse