This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Locke, S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Golem science and the public understanding of science: from deficit to dilemma

School of Social Science, Kingston University, Penrhyn Road, Kingston Upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2EE, s.locke{at}kingston.ac.uk

"Golem science" is Harry Collins and Trevor Pinch's humanized image of science, filled with irresolution, that they wish to substitute for the "god-like" image of definitive knowledge characteristic of public presentations of science. This god-like image creates unrealistic expectations that fuel "anti-scientific" reactions when unmet. This paper argues that the "flip-flop" view set forth by Collins and Pinch is a deficit model that positions the public as sociologically incompetent. It reflects the dilemma of professional social scientists who deconstruct science whilst appealing to the authority of science. This dilemma is an outcome of a deeper tension within science between the universal status of knowledge claims and the particular, human conditions of knowledge production. Drawing on discursive (or rhetorical) psychology, I show that this tension plays out in the rhetorical organization of scientific discourse in the form of a characteristic contrast between empiricist and contingent repertoires. A similar tension is discernible in everyday, mundane reasoning, which suggests that a golem image of science is already present in commonsense understanding alongside the "god-like" image. Thus, the public understanding of science is dilemmatically constituted, providing the conditions of argumentation with science seen in "antiscience"—itself a "folk devil" and rhetorical label. The analysis in this paper is illustrated using the example of creationism, which arises from an argumentative engagement with science that draws on the resources provided by the dilemma of science in conjunction with other resources drawn from Christianity. There is no simple "flip-flop" here. Further research into rhetorical reasoning in public understanding is called for on the grounds that greater appreciation of this is needed alongside golem science to improve relations between scientists and the public.

Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 8, No. 2, 75-92 (1999)
DOI: 10.1088/0963-6625/8/2/301


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Davies, E. McCallie, E. Simonsson, J. L. Lehr, and S. Duensing Discussing dialogue: perspectives on the value of science dialogue events that do not inform policy Public Understanding of Science, May 1, 2009; 18(3): 338 - 353. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Kahlor and S. Rosenthal If We Seek, Do We Learn?: Predicting Knowledge of Global Warming Science Communication, March 1, 2009; 30(3): 380 - 414. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. Prainsack and M. Kitzberger DNA behind bars: other ways of knowing forensic DNA technologies. Social Studies of Science, February 1, 2009; 39(1): 51 - 79. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Turner School science and its controversies; or, whatever happened to scientific literacy? Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2008; 17(1): 55 - 72. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Wright and B. Nerlich Use of the deficit model in a shared culture of argumentation: the case of foot and mouth science Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 2006; 15(3): 331 - 342. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Horst Cloning sensations: mass mediated articulation of social responses to controversial biotechnology Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2005; 14(2): 185 - 200. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. M. Collins and R. Evans King Canute Meets the Beach Boys: Responses to the Third Wave Social Studies of Science, June 1, 2003; 33(3): 435 - 452. [PDF]

				B. V. Lewenstein Editorial: A decade of Public Understanding Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2002; 11(1): 1 - 4. [PDF]

				S. Locke The Public Understanding of Science--A Rhetorical Invention Science Technology Human Values, January 1, 2002; 27(1): 87 - 111. [Abstract] [PDF]