DOCSLIB.ORG

An Invocation of Joshua Gunn and Sissela Bok James Thomas Begley Jr

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Invocation of Joshua Gunn and Sissela Bok James Thomas Begley Jr Duquesne University Duquesne Scholarship Collection Electronic Theses and Dissertations Spring 5-10-2019 The thicE s of Occultic Communication: An Invocation of Joshua Gunn and Sissela Bok James Thomas Begley Jr. Duquesne University Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/etd Part of the Applied Ethics Commons, Epistemology Commons, Philosophy of Language Commons, Rhetoric Commons, and the Speech and Rhetorical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Begley, J. T. (2019). The thicE s of Occultic Communication: An Invocation of Joshua Gunn and Sissela Bok (Doctoral dissertation, Duquesne University). Retrieved from https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/1758 This Immediate Access is brought to you for free and open access by Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. THE ETHICS OF OCCULTIC COMMUNICATION: AN INVOCATION OF JOSHUA GUNN AND SISSELA BOK A Dissertation Submitted to the McAnulty College and Graduate School of Liberal Arts Duquesne University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By James T. Begley May 2019 Copyright by James T. Begley 2019 THE ETHICS OF OCCULTIC COMMUNICATION AN INVOCATION OF JOSHUA GUNN AND SISSELA BOK By James T. Begley Approved December 14, 2018 ________________________________ ________________________________ Richard H. Thames, Ph.D. Janie M. Fritz, Ph.D. Professor of Communication Professor of Communication (Committee Chair) (Committee Member) ________________________________ Anthony M. Wachs, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Communication (Committee Member) ________________________________ ________________________________ James C. Swindal, Ph.D. Ronald C. Arnett Dean, McAnulty College and Graduate Chair, Department of Communication & School of Liberal Arts Rhetorical Studies Professor of Philosophy Professor of Rhetoric iii ABSTRACT THE ETHICS OF OCCULTIC COMMUNICATION AN INVOCATION OF JOSHUA GUNN AND SISSELA BOK By James Thomas Begley May 2019 Dissertation supervised by Richard Thames, Ph.D. Occultic rhetoric, according to Joshua Gunn, is a genre of discourse concerned with the study and practice of secret communications. The strategic sharing of secret messages involves a host of methods and conventions designed for the selective disclosure of hidden knowledge, thus controlling the boundaries of (and accessibility to power between) insider and outsider groups. Occultic rhetoric has its uses in everyday encounters, but the abuse of such manipulative strategies, especially by those in the academy and other positions of power and trust, calls for an ethical response. This dissertation submits occultic rhetoric to moral investigation by incorporating the works of Sissela Bok who examined the ethics of both secrecy and lying. By applying her principles to case studies of deliberately disguised or distorted messages in academic settings, this project suggests an approach for the moral exercise of secret communications, otherwise known as an ethics of occultic rhetoric. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction . 1 Dissertation Question . 2 Chapter I. Literature Review on the Obscurity of Language . 6 Section I.1: Notable Examples on the Obscurity of Language . 12 Section I.2: Challenges within Scientific & Postmodern Rhetoric . 23 Section I.3: Ethical Reflections on the Problem of Obscure Rhetoric . 32 Section I.4: On Secret Languages . 44 Section I.5: The Occult Connection . 53 Chapter II. Joshua Gunn and the Rhetoric of the Occult . 57 Section II.1: Occultism as Content and Form . 62 Section II.2: Blavatsky’s Occult Poetics . 68 Section II.3: Crowley’s Hermeneutics of Authority . 73 Section II.4: LaVey’s Ironic Imagery in the Mass Media . 82 Section II.5: Rhetorical Considerations . 89 Chapter III. Sissela Bok and the Ethics of Secrecy . 93 Section III.1: On Privacy and Lying . 96 Section III.2: The Principle of Intent . 102 v Section III.3: Secrecy and Power . 105 Section III.4: Ethical Considerations . 112 Chapter IV. Bok and Gunn on the Ethics of Occultic Rhetoric . 118 Section IV.1: The Occult and the Academy . 119 Section IV.2: The Conflicted Ethics of the Fool . 128 Section IV.3: Illuminating Gunn's Contradiction . 137 Section IV.4: Bok Renovates the Foundations . 148 Section IV.5: Contingent and Necessary Causes . 163 Section IV.6: Grappling with Hierarchies and Mystification . 175 Section IV.7: Discerning the Justifications . 190 Conclusion . 215 References . 219 vi INTRODUCTION “Philosophers are notorious for having private vocabularies.” —Mortimer Adler (1902-2001) Occultic rhetoric is a genre of human communication that is of central importance to scholars interested in exploring the tensions between clarity and obscurity. One such scholar is Joshua Gunn, associate professor of communication studies at the University of Texas at Austin, who has fashioned much of his career around studying “the category of the ineffable, and in particular, how people use and abuse signs and symbols to negotiate ineffability” (Gunn, 2015). Ineffable communication, characterized by much religious and poetical discourse, is the kind of communication that goes beyond the power of words to tell—to communicate the incommunicable. Gunn recognizes that efforts to engage divine mysteries and scientific unknowns have often resulted in language that can be difficult to interpret, and which can seem to convey a secretive knowledge that is privy only to those who can understand such language. Analysis of the uses and abuses of difficult speech was showcased in Gunn’s seminal work Modern Occult Rhetoric (2005) which focused on the “occultic” as a central metaphor for the type of secret-wielding rhetoric responsible for the creation of insider and outsider groups. As the above introductory quote by philosopher Mortimer Adler suggests, the jargon or “private vocabularies” of philosophers have a reputation for frustrating audiences because of a felt need to “coin new words, or to take some word from common speech and make it a technical word” (Adler & Doren, 1972, p. 105). Such difficulties of language, while necessary at times for purposes of accuracy, are used in other times for the “notorious” purposes of secrecy. By generating an atmosphere of uncertainty and confusion through deliberately obscure language, people can pass on secret messages in a 1 variety of exclusive and beguiling ways, the results of which have been used to influence or control public beliefs and behaviors. But what are the ethics of such manipulative strategies? How is one to ascertain the moral worth of rhetoric as it relates to engagements in secrecy and obfuscation? Such inquiries reflect a serious concern over the kind of questionable tactics to be found within cryptic forms of communication, exploited not only by philosophers, but also by politicians, scientists, gangs, poets, and the military. One group particularly adept in such language is the academicians within our colleges. Academic discourse has been equally guilty of committing to secretive vocabularies that tend to obscure meaning, and impair or discriminate understanding amongst their various audiences. DISSERTATION QUESTION The discriminatory rhetoric of secrecy has been increasingly practiced by modern academics in a way that resembles the historical rhetoric of occult practices. The rhetoric of the occult is a rhetoric of secrets—the keeping of secrets, as well as the subtle art of revealing them. Gunn draws on this connection between the rhetoric of the academy and the rhetoric of the occult, for both traditions seem to foster a particular pattern of communication that is characterized by mystery, enigma, and obscurity. The occult is Gunn’s case study from which he seeks to better understand the difficult language of the academy. The academy too often engages in modes of thought and expression that leave audiences feeling baffled or excluded, while for others eliciting feelings of insight and privilege. Gunn terms this genre of rhetoric the “occultic”—the language of secrecy. The occultic is Gunn’s “cool, new term” for the type of language responsible for controlling the flow of hidden knowledge and the way it is understood by insiders and outsiders. 2 Occultic rhetoric is “a popular social phenomenon that is currently difficult to capture and, consequently, rarely discussed in scholarly literature” (Gunn, 2005, p. xxviii). Part of the reason why the occultic is rarely discussed is because it is difficult to define. Occultic rhetoric shares in the irony of being occultic itself, for as Gunn admits, occultic rhetoric is a concept shrouded in theoretical complexity: “readers expecting a direct or definitive definition of the term are likely to be disappointed. To understand something as ‘rhetorical’ is to understand it as negotiable, as a contingent and protean object that can only be discerned partially and indirectly through case studies” (2005, p. xxiii). A “protean object” is a fitting way to describe the heart of occultic rhetoric, for it refers to Proteus—the Greek god who could change his shape, readily assuming different forms (De Romilly, 1975, p. 28). The philosopher Plato (428-348 BC) once referred to sophistic rhetoricians as dangerous magicians because, like Proteus, they could give truth different shapes. Such is the case here when dealing with occultic rhetoric which attempts to represent (or give shape to) hidden, ineffable truths. The hidden, the protean, the vague, the strange, the mysterious
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fcaglp, Unlp, 2018
    Scientific Philosophy Gustavo E. Romero IAR-CONICET/UNLP, Argentina FCAGLP, UNLP, 2018 Epistemology Episteme, as distinguished from techne, is etymologically derived from the Ancient Greek word ἐπιστήμη for knowledge or science, which comes from the verb ἐπίσταμαι, "to know". In Plato's terminology episteme means knowledge, as in "justified true belief", in contrast to doxa, common belief or opinion. The word epistemology, meaning the study of knowledge, is derived from episteme. Plato Epistemology is the general study of cognitive processes and their outcome: knowledge. Knowledge is the product of cognitive operations made by an inquiring subject. It is not a thing or a substance, but a series of brain changes in the knower. Knowledge is not independent of the knowing subject, although we often feign it is for practical reasons. Knowledge is different from belief: I can know a story, for instance, but do not believe it. Belief implies a psychological adherence to some propositions. It is possible to believe something without understanding it, so belief is not necessary associated with neither truth nor justification. Knowledge acquisition requires a modification of the brain of the knower. This can be done in different ways, hence there are different kinds of knowledge. (i) Sensory-motor knowledge: the result of learning from actions. (ii) Perceptual knowledge: the result of perceiving events, either internal or external to the subject. (iii) Conceptual or propositional knowledge: the result of ideation, conjecturing, testing, correcting. Notice that not all knowledge is beneficial: we can learn trivialities, falsehoods, or highly harmful habits The three kind of knowledge are interrelated: conceptual knowledge can improve motor skills and perception; perception is used to evaluate conjectures; motor skills can help to improve perception and build instruments such as books, that enhance the ability to learn.
    [Show full text]
  • The Publish Or Perish Book
    The Publish or Perish Book Your guide to effective and responsible citation analysis Anne-Wil Harzing Edition: September 2010 For inquiries about this book, refer to the book's web page: http://www.harzing.com/popbook.htm ISBN 978-0-9808485-0-2 (PDF) ISBN 978-0-9808485-1-9 (paperback, colour) ISBN 978-0-9808485-2-6 (paperback, black & white) © 2010 by Anne-Wil Harzing All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means (including electronic mail, photocopying, recording, or information sto- rage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher. As the SOLE exception to the above if you purchased this book in its PDF edition, then you are allowed to print 1 (one) hard copy for your own use only for each licence that you pur- chased. Published by Tarma Software Research Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia. National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry: Author Harzing, Anne-Wil. Title The publish or perish book [electronic resource]: Your guide to effective and responsible citation analysis / Anne-Wil Harzing. Edition 1st ed. ISBN 9780980848502 (pdf) Notes Includes bibliographical references. Subjects Publish or perish (Computer program), Authorship, Academic writing, Scholarly publishing. Dewey Number 808.02 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE .................................................................................................................................... VII CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO CITATION ANALYSIS ...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Publish Or Perish
    Publish or Perish Maximizing the impact of your next publication Andrew Plume, Director – Scientometrics & Market Analysis City Graduate School Welcome Event - 18th November 2013 The research life: Enable, do, share Recruit/evaluate Secure Establish Manage Develop researchers funding partnerships facilities Strategy ? Search, read, Collaborate & Experiment Analyze & review network synthesize ! Have Manage data Publish and Commercialise Promote impact disseminate 2 The research life: Publish or Perish 3 Publish or Perish: Origin 4 Publish or Perish: Evidence of published authors agree/strongly agree*: “My career depends on a history of publishing research 81% articles in peer reviewed journals” Institutional: Career advancement and funding Reasons for National: Research assessment exercises agreeing Global: Research dissemination is a goal of research Articles in peer-reviewed journals make the most At my institution, there are defined thresholds of important contribution to my career in terms of status, publications for academic promotions at least during merit pay, and marketability, vs. teaching or service. early career. Engineering & Technology, UK (36-45) Social Science, USA (36-45) If I publish well (Impact Factor, h-index) I have more Because the primary role of my job is to produce chance to get a better position and to have grants. research which is of no use if it does not get into the Medicine & Allied Health, Italy (46-55) public domain. Earth & Planetary Sciences, UK (56-65) * Survey of 3,090 published authors in November 2012
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching Scientific Literacy Through a Science Technology and Society Course: Prospective Elementary Science Teachers’ Case
    The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – TOJET October 2004 ISSN: 1303-6521 volume 3 Issue 4 Article 8 TEACHING SCIENTIFIC LITERACY THROUGH A SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY COURSE: PROSPECTIVE ELEMENTARY SCIENCE TEACHERS’ CASE Dr. Esra MACAROGLU AKGUL Ataturk Faculty Of Education Marmara University, Goztepe Campus Istanbul-Turkey e-address: [email protected] phone: 05365268728 (mobile) mail address: Mandıra Cad. Onay Sitesi 3. blok D:3 Merdivenkoy 34732 Istanbul-Turkey ABSTRACT The study examines Turkish pre-service elementary science teachers’ scientific literacy levels. The research took place in Marmara University, in 2001-2002 academic year. The research participants were twenty randomly chosen students among all senior classes of the university mentioned above. The research data were gathered with the documents, i.e. class assignments and activities, collected in science-technology and society course performance portfolios. Interviews with students and field notes from the class were used for data triangulation. Participants’ definitions of scientific literacy were determined with document analysis and open coding of data. Then, assertions to explain findings were formed. The assertions displayed that participants define scientific literacy in relation with thinking and inquiry. However; they are having problems to define the term scientific. Documents displayed that although participants had some traditional understandings about science, they hold more contemporary views about scientific literacy. INTRODUCTION Almost all developing and developed countries have the purpose of increasing scientific literacy level of public among their educational goals. This purpose also takes place in Turkish educational agenda. The first step to reach that purpose is to define scientific literacy. There is no consensus on the definition of scientific literacy concept in literature.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Academic Freedom Policies on Critical Thinking Instruction
    The Impact of Academic Freedom Policies on Critical Thinking Instruction Shirley Fessel, MA, MEd Instructor of English Park University Critical thinking enjoys almost universal support, except when applied to controversial topics. Yet it is these topics that are often the most effective initiators of critical thinking exercises that improve students’ rational approaches to challenging problems. The use of controversial issues to promote critical thinking requires an institutional commitment to academic freedom in order to survive. In some institutional contexts, the most crucial need for critical thinking is the very condition under which it is least likely to be applied. Instead, avoidance of controversy seems to be the predominant policy of institutions fearful of expensive lawsuits or damaging public relations. Several trends are decreasing the likelihood that critical thinking is applied in the classroom to challenging topics: demands for increased accountability from legislatures; scrutiny of adopted content standards; oversight of Internet and other intellectual work of professors affiliated with the universities; student challenges to faculty instruction; and attempts to curtail ideological diversity. This paper describes these current dynamics which erode academic freedom and thus the ability to apply critical thinking to controversial topics. The paper also recommends that institutions and faculty adopt clearly delineated policies related to academic freedom in order to ensure faculty freedom to promote critical thinking. Awareness of how these trends impact the instructional climate enables teachers to design instruction and be more proactive in guaranteeing that critical thinking about controversial topics is able to flourish under academic freedom. Critical thinking is defined as making judgments about the truthfulness and worth of the statement.
    [Show full text]
  • The State of Inclusive Science Communication: a Landscape Study
    The State of Inclusive Science Communication: A Landscape Study Katherine Canfield and Sunshine Menezes Metcalf Institute, University of Rhode Island Graphics by Christine Liu This report was developed for the University of Rhode Island’s Metcalf Institute with generous support from The Kavli Foundation. Cite as: Canfield, K. & Menezes, S. 2020. The State of Inclusive Science Communication: A Landscape Study. Metcalf Institute, University of Rhode Island. Kingston, RI. 77 pp. Executive Summary Inclusive science communication (ISC) is a new and broad term that encompasses all efforts to engage specific audiences in conversations or activities about science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) topics, including, but not limited to, public engagement, informal science learning, journalism, and formal science education. Unlike other approaches toward science communication, however, ISC research and practice is grounded in inclusion, equity, and intersectionality, making these concerns central to the goals, design, implementation, evaluation, and refinement of science communication efforts. Together, the diverse suite of insights and practices that inform ISC comprise an emerging movement. While there is a growing recognition of the value and urgency of inclusive approaches, there is little documented knowledge about the potential catalysts and barriers for this work. Without documentation, synthesis, and critical reflection, the movement cannot proceed as quickly as is warranted. The University of Rhode Island’s Metcalf
    [Show full text]
  • How to Read a Book
    How To Read A Book By Mortimer J. Adler And Charles Van Doren 1972 1 Preface How to Read a Book was first published in the early months of 1940. To my surprise and, I confess, to my delight, it immediately became a best seller and remained at the top of the nationwide best-seller list for more than a year. Since 1940, it has continued to be widely circulated in numerous printings, both hard- cover and paperback, and it has been translated into other languages—French, Swedish, German, Spanish, and Italian. Why, then, attempt to recast and rewrite the book for the present generation of readers? The reasons for doing so lie in changes that have taken place both in our society in the last thirty years and in the subject itself. Today many more of the young men and women who complete high school enter and complete four years of college; a much larger proportion of the population has become literate in spite of or even because of the popularity of radio and television. There has been a shift of interest from the reading of fiction to the reading of nonfiction. The educators of the country have acknowledged that teaching the young to read, in the most elementary sense of that word, is our paramount educational problem. A recent Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, designating the seventies as the Decade of Reading, has dedicated federal funds in support of a wide variety of efforts to improveproficiency in this basic skill, and many of those efforts have scored some success at the level at which children are initiated into the art of reading.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change: How Do We Know We're Not Wrong? Naomi Oreskes
    Changing Planet: Past, Present, Future Lecture 4 – Climate Change: How Do We Know We’re Not Wrong? Naomi Oreskes, PhD 1. Start of Lecture Four (0:16) [ANNOUNCER:] From the Howard Hughes Medical Institute...The 2012 Holiday Lectures on Science. This year's lectures: "Changing Planet: Past, Present, Future," will be given by Dr. Andrew Knoll, Professor of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology at Harvard University; Dr. Naomi Oreskes, Professor of History and Science Studies at the University of California, San Diego; and Dr. Daniel Schrag, Professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Harvard University. The fourth lecture is titled: Climate Change: How Do We Know We're Not Wrong? And now, a brief video to introduce our lecturer Dr. Naomi Oreskes. 2. Profile of Dr. Naomi Oreskes (1:14) [DR. ORESKES:] One thing that's really important for all people to understand is that the whole notion of certainty is mistaken, and it's something that climate skeptics and deniers and the opponents of evolution really exploit. Many of us think that scientific knowledge is certain, so therefore if someone comes along and points out the uncertainties in a certain scientific body of knowledge, we think that undermines the science, we think that means that there's a problem in the science, and so part of my message is to say that that view of science is incorrect, that the reality of science is that it's always uncertain because if we're actually doing research, it means that we're asking questions, and if we're asking questions, then by definition we're asking questions about things we don't already know about, so uncertainty is part of the lifeblood of science, it's something we need to embrace and realize it's a good thing, not a bad thing.
    [Show full text]
  • Academics No Longer Think: How the Neoliberalization Of
    ACADEMICS NO LONGER THINK: HOW THE NEOLIBERALIZATION OF ACADEMIA LEADS TO THOUGHTLESSNESS by JUSTIN MICAH PACK A DISSERTATION Presented to the Department of Philosophy and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2015 DISSERTATION APPROVAL PAGE Student: Justin Micah Pack Title: Academics No Longer Think: How the Neoliberalization of Academia Leads to Thoughtlessness This dissertation has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in the Department of Philosophy by: Bonnie Mann Chairperson Alejandro Vallega Core Member Rocío Zambrana Core Member Jerry Roziek Institutional Representative and Scott L. Pratt Dean of the Graduate School Original approval signatures are on file with the University of Oregon Graduate School. Degree awarded December 2015 ii © 2015 Justin Micah Pack iii DISSERTATION ABSTRACT Justin Micah Pack Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy December 2015 Title: Academics No Longer Think: How the Neoliberalization of Academia Leads to Thoughtlessness In my dissertation, I argue that the neoliberalization of higher education results in the university becoming less and less a place of wonder, self-cultivation and thinking and instead more and more a place to specialize, strategize and produce. This is a result of the volatile infusion and mixing of the logic of calculative rationality at work in consumer capitalism with the logic of scientific instrumental rationality already hegemonic in academia. This adds to the demands of the academic world of production the demands of the world of consumption. Now the academic (and also the student) is interpellated not only as a producer of knowledge but also as an object of consumption (to be consumed by others).
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 4 (2018), 386-407 DOI:10.17351/ests2018.228 Challenging Power, Constructing Boundaries, and Confronting Anxieties: Michael Kattirtzi Talks with Andrew Stirling MICHAEL KATTIRTZI1 UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH ANDREW STIRLING2 UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX Abstract In this interview, Andy Stirling talks to Michael Kattirtzi about what initially drew him to Science and Technology Studies, his account of the impact of the Science Wars on the field, and why it matters that STS researchers do not shy away from challenging incumbents. Through a series of thoughtful reflections on his encounters with STS researchers, Stirling arrives at the conclusion that we should not expect the field to reconcile tensions that are more deeply rooted in society. Nonetheless, he hopes that in the future STS researchers will be more open and admitting of a plurality of epistemic perspectives within the field and avoid overly constraining it––all the while as he continues to demonstrate the value of appreciating such epistemic pluralism to policy- makers and stakeholders. A reflection by Michael Kattirtzi follows the interview. Keywords interview; Andy Stirling; epistemic diversity; normative commitments; disciplines; reflexivity First Encounters MK Let’s start with your own involvement with Science and Technology Studies, and your own sort of background––I know you remember your time in Edinburgh fondly. AS It was a formative experience for me––one of the most galvanizing of my intellectual life. Actually also my personal life, because it was in the Science Studies Unit (SSU) that I met my partner, Topsy Jewell (who was studying science studies with zoology). But I only had a small exposure to the SSU compared to other people you’ll be interviewing, because I was just an undergraduate.
    [Show full text]
  • “Hard-Won” Consensus Brent Ranalli
    Ranalli • Climate SCienCe, ChaRaCteR, and the “haRd-Won” ConSenSuS Brent Ranalli Climate Science, Character, and the “Hard-Won” Consensus ABSTRACT: What makes a consensus among scientists credible and convincing? This paper introduces the notion of a “hard-won” consensus and uses examples from recent debates over climate change science to show that this heuristic stan- dard for evaluating the quality of a consensus is widely shared. The extent to which a consensus is “hard won” can be understood to depend on the personal qualities of the participating experts; the article demonstrates the continuing util- ity of the norms of modern science introduced by Robert K. Merton by showing that individuals on both sides of the climate science debate rely intuitively on Mertonian ideas—interpreted in terms of character—to frame their arguments. INTRodUCTIoN he late Michael Crichton, science fiction writer and climate con- trarian, once remarked: “Whenever you hear the consensus of Tscientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results” (Crichton 2003). Reproducibility of results and other methodological criteria are indeed the proper basis for scientific judgments. But Crichton is wrong to say that consensus is irrel- evant. Consensus among scientists serves to certify facts for the lay public.1 Those on the periphery of the scientific enterprise (i.e., policy makers and the public), who don’t have the time or the expertise or the equipment to check results for themselves, necessarily rely on the testimony of those at the center.
    [Show full text]
  • Advancing Science Communication.Pdf
    SCIENCETreise, Weigold COMMUNICATION / SCIENCE COMMUNICATORS Scholars of science communication have identified many issues that may help to explain why sci- ence communication is not as “effective” as it could be. This article presents results from an exploratory study that consisted of an open-ended survey of science writers, editors, and science communication researchers. Results suggest that practitioners share many issues of concern to scholars. Implications are that a clear agenda for science communication research now exists and that empirical research is needed to improve the practice of communicating science. Advancing Science Communication A Survey of Science Communicators DEBBIE TREISE MICHAEL F. WEIGOLD University of Florida The writings of science communication scholars suggest twodominant themes about science communication: it is important and it is not done well (Hartz and Chappell 1997; Nelkin 1995; Ziman 1992). This article explores the opinions of science communication practitioners with respect to the sec- ond of these themes, specifically, why science communication is often done poorly and how it can be improved. The opinions of these practitioners are important because science communicators serve as a crucial link between the activities of scientists and the public that supports such activities. To intro- duce our study, we first review opinions as to why science communication is important. We then examine the literature dealing with how well science communication is practiced. Authors’Note: We would like to acknowledge NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center for provid- ing the funds todothis research. We alsowant tothank Rick Borcheltforhis help with the collec - tion of data. Address correspondence to Debbie Treise, University of Florida, College of Journalism and Communications, P.O.
    [Show full text]