University of Wollongong Research Online University of Wollongong Thesis Collection 1954-2016 University of Wollongong Thesis Collections 2004 Legitimating Astronomy Graham Howard University of Wollongong Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/theses University of Wollongong Copyright Warning You may print or download ONE copy of this document for the purpose of your own research or study. The University does not authorise you to copy, communicate or otherwise make available electronically to any other person any copyright material contained on this site. You are reminded of the following: This work is copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part of this work may be reproduced by any process, nor may any other exclusive right be exercised, without the permission of the author. Copyright owners are entitled to take legal action against persons who infringe their copyright. A reproduction of material that is protected by copyright may be a copyright infringement. A court may impose penalties and award damages in relation to offences and infringements relating to copyright material. Higher penalties may apply, and higher damages may be awarded, for offences and infringements involving the conversion of material into digital or electronic form. Unless otherwise indicated, the views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the University of Wollongong. Recommended Citation Howard, Graham, Legitimating Astronomy , PhD thesis, School of Social Science, Media and Communication, University of Wollongong, 2004. http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/333 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] 1 LEGITIMATING ASTRONOMY A thesis in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy from University of Wollongong by Graham Howard, B.A., Ms.Soc. Science, Technology and Society 2004 2 CERTIFICATION I, Graham Howard, declare that this thesis, submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the award of Doctor of Philosophy, in Science, Technology and Society, University of Wollongong, is wholly my own work unless otherwise referenced or acknowledged. The document has not been submitted for qualifications at any other academic institution. Graham Howard 3 Table of Contents Abstract 6 Acknowledgements 7 Explanatory Note on Style 7 Introduction 8 Legitimation of Science 9 The Relevance of Legitimacy to Astronomy 12 The Institutionalisation of Science 15 The Institutionalisation of Astronomy 16 Structure of the Thesis 26 Chapter One — Astronomers in the Political Process 30 Introduction 30 Astronomers and Public Policy 32 Engaging with the Legislature 33 Planetary Versus Galactic and Extragalactic Astronomy 44 Four Case Studies 45 Jodrell Bank 46 The Gemini Project 53 The Hubble Space Telescope 56 The International Space Station 62 Conclusion 64 Chapter Two — Astronomy as Big Science 67 Introduction 67 The Concept of ‘Big Science’ as Applied to Astronomy 67 The Evolution of Astronomy into Big Science 70 The Problem of Funding 73 The Scale of Astronomy Funding 75 Astronomy’s Ambivalent Position 82 The Economic Vulnerability of Astronomy 87 4 Astronomers’ Skills as Legitimators 88 The Case of Chile 91 The Internationalisation of Astronomy 94 When Big Science Goes Wrong 101 Conclusion 104 Chapter Three — Astronomy as Popular Culture: The Role of Popularisers in the Legitimation Process 108 Introduction 108 Popular Culture and the Popularisation of Science 109 Historical Aspects of Astronomy Popularisation 111 The Popularisation of Pure Science 114 The Popularity of Astronomy 119 Successful Popularisers 121 Carl Sagan 121 Paul Davies 126 Sir Patrick Moore 131 A Study in Failure: The Early Promotion of the Hubble Space Telescope 133 The Role of Trust in the Popularisation of Astronomy 140 Popularisation and Inequality 144 Socio-Cultural Aspects of Astronomy Popularisation 147 Conclusion 149 Chapter Four — Boundary Work in Astronomy 153 The Concept of Demarcation 153 Fred Hoyle and Panspermia 157 Velikovsky 162 Astrology 166 Ufology 167 The Search for Extra-terrestrial Intelligence (SETI) 181 Amateur Astronomy 185 5 Astronomy and Physics 191 Astronomy as Pure Science 194 Physical Boundaries 195 Demarcation Dispute 1 — Astronomers Versus Physicists 199 Demarcation Dispute 2 — Astronomers Versus Engineers 203 Demarcation Dispute 3 — Astronomers Versus Astronomers 205 Disciplinary Boundary Work 210 Conclusion — Why Do Astronomers Engage in Boundary Work? 211 Chapter Five — Astronomy as a Profession 215 Introduction — Professionalism and Legitimacy 215 Astronomy as an Occupation and Career 224 Professional Astronomy and Amateur Astronomy 227 The Scientific Professions and the Enlightenment 232 Astronomers as Intellectuals 236 The Role of Mathematics 239 Conclusion 245 Conclusion 247 Taxonomy of Legitimations 249 Popularisation 254 Boundary Work 256 Purity as Legitimation 257 A Humanistic Discipline 260 Technoscientific Societies 266 Pure Science and the Human Condition 272 Appendix — Interviews with Astronomers 280 Bibliography 286 Table 1 — The Scale of Astronomy Funding 75 Table 2 — Details of Interviews with Astronomers 285 6 ABSTRACT Science is usually justified in terms of its utilitarian attributes. Modern professional astronomy has no obvious utilitarian rationale, yet it receives considerable resources to carry on its work. Concepts from the sociology of science and political sociology can be used to help explain this apparent puzzle. The means by which astronomy succeeds in procuring resources can be seen in terms of a process of legitimation. Professional astronomy justifies and explains itself to specific audiences, ensuring that funding agencies will see astronomy as worthy of support. Several activities are suggested as legitimation practices. The mechanics of funding are discussed, followed by a description of modern professional astronomy as a ‘big science’. Boundary work and popularisation are examined as important legitimation practices. Boundary work constructs a path for astronomy that legitimises it by allying the field to successful sciences such as physics, and distancing it from other activities such as ufology and astrology. Astronomy is popular with the public, and this popularity gives rise to a groundswell of support, and is used to promote astronomy as educating a public that will support science in general. The professional structures of astronomy serve to mark out astronomers as an elite scientific group, with an esoteric knowledge that includes high levels of mathematics. Astronomers” specialist technical skills can be of use in a variety of situations, but the scientific and mathematical knowledge itself also contributes to successful legitimation. It is concluded that the primary rationale for the funding of astronomy is humanistic rather than utilitarian. 7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I thank my supervisor, Dr. Brian Martin, for his support, and especially for his flexibility and tolerance; Madeline O’Connor, for giving me the time to work on the thesis; and Linda Giovinazzo, for proofreading the manuscript. I dedicate this thesis to Dr. Andrew Collier, Department of Philosophy, University of Southampton, England. EXPLANATORY NOTE ON STYLE The style used throughout the thesis is MLA (Modern Language Association). Dates of cited works in the text are not included unless there is more than one work cited by the same author. Double quotes are used for direct quotes of persons. Other quotes, for example to express scepticism, irony, or obliqueness, are single quotes. 8 INTRODUCTION According to a recent U.S. Government commissioned report, “The fundamental goal of astronomy and astrophysics is to understand how the universe and its constituent galaxies, stars, and planets formed, how they evolved, and what their destiny will be” (National Research Council 2001: 3). Working towards this goal requires enormous resources. Therefore modern professional astronomy is an expensive science. Conventional assumptions about science stress its practical utility and instrumental links with development (Drori et al. 2). But astronomy is a science that has no obvious utilitarian rationale. As Drori et al. ask “What practical applications follow from evidence of ice on Jupiter?” (Drori et al. 12). And “Much scientific activity has always seemed to have few instrumental benefits for the modern system or for particular elites in it, as with the current and expensive exploration of various distant and receding galaxies” (Drori et al. 27). Drori et al. give numerous historical examples of investments in science that have no instrumental component (Drori et al 224), and most of their examples are from astronomy: “scientists are given resources to study the origins of the universe, the moons of Jupiter, the possibility of life on Mars, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, the origins and evolution of mankind, and so on. Such understandings count as ‘progress’ of a sort. However, it is difficult to imagine that such investments produce enhanced immediate economic returns, especially relative to other possible investments” (Drori et al. 225). So how do astronomers garner resources from society? In particular, what arguments, tactics and strategies do they use? In other words, astronomers, their lobbyists and supporters must resort to various legitimation practices to ensure that their discipline