Culture, Science and Dialogue: An Introduction (original) (raw)
Related papers
Science dialogues: Talking about science
New Zealand Science Review, 2005
New Zealand Science Review Vol 62 (3) 2005 90 To promote greater social discussion of science, bringing to-gether scientists and members of the public in face-to-face dia-logue might seem like an obvious idea. However, for many people science is a complicated subject ...
2013
Communicating is the doing of science. Scientists need new skills, and must develop the ability to be self-reflective in order to move from a linear model of “public understanding of science” to a “democratic” model where they share with non-experts societal and scientific problems. Working on the formulation of research questions is one way to improve scientists’ communication skills, to encourage them to be reflective practitioners and to prepare them to be mediators in the processes of communicating science. Réflexives are spaces of systemic communication and mediation, facilitated by researchers who conduct creativity workshops. Linguistic skills are developed in writing workshops. Projects and practices are debated, using epistemology-in-practice, reflective practice, dialogue and real work situations. Researchers are expected to be better writers and speakers and to be better able to link across the cultural differences existing between partners involved in a research process....
Dialogue and debate in a Post-Normal Practice of Science: A reflexion
Scientific activities are always embedded in the cultural matrix that gives purpose to the enterprise, and so we need to develop a rich and meaningful view of social reality. In doing so we realise that we all live different lives, but each of us can broaden our knowledge of the social world through dialogue with others. If scientific questions, which relate directly to society, were researched in a ‘dialogical’ manner, ways would be sought to understand the concerned individuals, populations or stakeholders. While never rejecting concern for internal coherence and rigour, science can cope better with future uncertainties, and better solve the problems of those peoples that make up society, by extensively utilising social dialogue.
Culture and Dialogue, 2016
How do we understand the sciences and discourses about them? Aspects of philosophical dialogue are highlighted and considered in ways that reveal distinct domains of enquiry relating to culture, science and mathematics. This analysis serves to contextualize the nature and content of the papers selected for the collection.
Thinking Like a Man? The Cultures of Science
Women: A Cultural Review, 2003
Reading too much to see, writing too much to think', licensed intellectuals today are usually too cut off from wider audiences even to deserve the Wildean derision they once received. Yet the public domain has its wellknown hazards. Academics rarely set its agenda, even when we do manage to address an audience beyond the barely-read journals stringent funding bodies force us into. Accordingly, I did not set the agenda when I agreed to present a session in Birkbeck's public lecture series: Close Encounters: Culture Meets Science. An odd situation, when I have tried to be the sternest critic of the dualism such 'encounter' excites-however intimate. The battle lines are familiar in Britian's upmarket media: while wellknown psychiatrist Raj Persuad can be heard arguing that science needs art, the equally recognizable biologist Lewis Wolpert insists that never the twain shall meet. Beyond binary conflicts, however, not only does culture include science but, more significantly, science includes culture. To say this is to say, one might think, very little; yet it remains profoundly contentious-the ground for endless battles. It is to suggest, merely, that at any time we come to the sphere of science with all our everyday pre-conceptions in place. At least in the world of human and social affairs, the nature of the empirical research which gets done and, in particular, the way it is broadcast and popularised, whether by scientists or their promoters, always reflects the assumptions and goals of the culture around it, or certain pockets of it. And in the dazzling techno-world we now occupy the extraordinary degree of information available to us itself triggers ubiquitous debates over science, which is altogether a good thing if-and only if-it does not lead to instant polarizations. Culture includes science; science includes culture; yet it is certain that, throughout modern times, it is a mutual stand-off between what is seen as the two separate traditions which has encouraged the most intensely sectarian forms of professional rivalry, animosity and conflict, both within and without the academy. The eternal return of wars supposedly between culture and science or, put more judiciously, within the "two cultures", take us back at least to where most date the birth of Reason, to the 1780s. This was when the philosopher Immanuel Kant (troubled by David Hume's empiricism) awakened from his 'dogmatic
A dialogue on hard sciences is possible. Is it useful too?
Journal of Science Communication, 2008
Dialogical models in science communication produce effective and satisfactory experiences, also when hard sciences (like astrophysics or cosmology) are concerned. But those efforts to reach the public can be of modest impact since the public is no longer (or not sufficiently) interested in science. The reason of this lack of interest is not that science is an alien topic, but that contemporary science and technology have ceased to offer a convincing model for the human progress.
The sociological nature of science communication, by L. d'Andrea and A. Declich
The article proposes a reflection on science communication and on the communicative processes characteristic to the production of new-found knowledge. It aims to outline the role that sociology can play within this frame for greater understanding. The article first defines the main evolutionary trends in scientific research in recent decades, with particular reference to the emergence of new social actors. Following on from this, it will look at some of the epistemological conditions that may strengthen the sociologist's role in the cognition of scientific production. Using this as a premise, we will look at a typology for science communication and its components, as well as some of its governing principles. The conclusion of the article indicates the added value that can be gained from the use of such a model, with the particular aim of identifying indicators that allow the evaluation of scientific research in sociological terms as well as those already in existence.