Science autobiography Research Papers - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
In 2012, Jennifer Doudna et al published their landmark paper on CRISPR-Cas9. Five years later, Doudna published an autobiographical retrospect to come to terms with the "tsunami" of events that followed. The subtitle suggests that humans... more
In 2012, Jennifer Doudna et al published their landmark paper on CRISPR-Cas9. Five years later, Doudna published an autobiographical retrospect to come to terms with the "tsunami" of events that followed. The subtitle suggests that humans acquired "unthinkable power" to refurbish life and deflect the course of evolution. Yet, the subtitle of the prologue suggests a different view on human agency, seeing CRISPR as a technological pandemic, stressing our powerlessness to develop ethical and governance tools to contain the process. We seem overwhelmed by a surging biotechnological event. Science autobiographies constitute a fascinating genre, providing a window into the context of discovery, revealing what often remains unsaid in more formal academic publications. But they describe events from a decidedly personal and partisan perspective, wavering between self-analysis and self-justification, putting the individual frontstage, obfuscating how research is a collective endeavour. Doudna's memoirs are analysed from three perspectives: the knowledge perspective (CRISPR as a shift from reading to re-editing genomes), the power perspective (memoirs as instruments in controversies over IPR) and the ethical perspective. Normative challenges allow researchers to constitute themselves as responsible subjects, by developing new skills (bioethical deliberation), while calling forth new practices of the Self (writing science autobiographies). While traditional narrative suggests that, after an increase in dramatic tension, a period of equilibrium sets in, Doudna's retrospect voices the unsettling concern that we may lose control over the disruptive deflection we helped to bring about. 2
In 2003, biophysicist and Nobel Laureate Maurice Wilkins published his autobiography entitled The Third Man. In the preface, he diffidently points out that the title (which presents him as the ‘third’ man credited with the co-discovery of... more
In 2003, biophysicist and Nobel Laureate Maurice Wilkins published his autobiography entitled The Third Man. In the preface, he diffidently points out that the title (which presents him as the ‘third’ man credited with the co-discovery of the structure of DNA, besides Watson and Crick) was chosen by his publisher, as a reference to the famous 1949 movie no doubt, featuring Orson Welles in his classical role as penicillin racketeer Harry Lime. In this paper I intend to show that there is much more to this title than merely its familiar ring. If subjected to a (psychoanalytically inspired) comparative analysis, multiple correspondences between movie and memoirs can be brought to the fore. Taken together, these documents shed an intriguing light on the vicissitudes of budding life sciences research during the post-war era. I will focus my comparative analysis on issues still relevant today, such as dual use, the handling of sensitive scientific information (in a moral setting defined by the tension between collaboration and competition) and, finally, on the interwovenness of science and warfare (i.e. the ‘militarisation’ of research and the relationship between beauty and destruction). Thus, I will explain how science autobiographies on the one hand and genres of the imagination (such as novels and movies) on the other may deepen our comprehension of tensions and dilemmas of life sciences research then and now. For that reason, science autobiographies can provide valuable input (case material) for teaching philosophy and history of science to science students.