Public Understanding of Science

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haynes, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 12, No. 3, 243-253 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0963662503123003

From Alchemy to Artificial Intelligence: Stereotypes of the Scientist in Western Literature

Roslynn Haynes

University of New South Wales, Australia and Australian Academy of the Humanities, R.Haynes{at}unsw.edu.au

Throughout Western culture, the master narrative of the scientist is of an evil and dangerous man. This simplification underlying contemporary mythology of knowledge arises from fear of the power and change that science entails, leaving many people feeling confused and disempowered. It reemerges in the media, most often under the name of "Frankenstein, " with any new discovery that appears to threaten social equilibrium. This is not a new phenomenon. From medieval stories about alchemists to films about computer hackers, good scientists are in the minority, and the number of recurring stereotypes is small. Seven are identified: the evil alchemist; the noble scientist as hero or savior of society; the foolish scientist, whether the gullible, seventeenth-century virtuoso or the absent-minded professor; the inhuman researcher of romanticism; the scientist as adventurer, transcending boundaries of space and time; the mad, bad, dangerous scientist, unscrupulous in the exercise of power; and the helpless scientist, unable to control the outcome of his or her work. These archetypes offer writers and filmmakers a convenient shorthand, a matrix in which to slot contemporary scientists and their projects, simplifying the issues. Like all myths, they appear simple but represent complex ideas and suppressed fears, which transcend time, place, and race.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Science CommunicationHome page
M. C. Powell and M. Colin
Meaningful Citizen Engagement in Science and Technology: What Would it Really Take?
Science Communication, September 1, 2008; 30(1): 126 - 136.
[Abstract] [PDF]