First Discussion of Scientific Controversies

2005 ◽  
pp. 267-290
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Controversies

The Dimensions of Scientific Controversy: The Biometric—Mendelian Debate

1989 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 299-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Olby
Keyword(s):  
Social History ◽  
Scientific Activity ◽  
Scientific Controversy ◽  
Sociological Factors ◽  
Sociological Approach ◽  
Scientific Controversies ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Scientific Arguments

The increasing attention which has been given to social history of science and to the sociological analysis of scientific activity has resulted in a renewed interest in scientific controversies. Furthermore, the rejection of the presentist view of history, according to which those contestants who took what we can identify, with the benefit of modern knowledge, as the ‘right’ stand in a controversy, were right and their opponents were ‘wrong’, left the subject of scientific controversies with many questions. What determines their emergence, course and resolution? When Froggatt and Nevin wrote on the Bio-metric-Mendelian controversy in 1971 they called their article ‘descriptive rather than interpretative’, so they avoided the very questions we would like to ask. Provine, in the same year, concentrated on the strong personalities of the contestants, their clashes, and the scientific arguments in play. But in 1975 Mackenzie and Barnes argued that the controversy could not be accounted for unless recourse was had to sociological factors. Their view has become widely known and figured prominently in 1982 in Steven Shapin's recital of the empirical achievements of the application of the sociological approach. I have returned to this subject because I do not yet feel altogether convinced by Mackenzie and Barnes' analysis. Even if their analysis of the controversy between Pearson and Bateson be accepted, it is not so obvious how effectively it can be used to explain the controversy between Weldon and Bateson, and I am not confident that it is adequate for an understanding of the evolution of their differing views of the mechanism of evolution.

Publics, Scientists and the State: Mapping the Global Human Genome Editing Controversy

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-28
Author(s):  
Ya-Wen Lei
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Human Genome ◽  
Genome Editing ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
The State ◽  
Scientific Controversies ◽  
Chinese State ◽  
National Expert ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Literature on scientific controversies has inadequately attended to the impact of globalization and, more specifically, the emergence of China as a leader in scientific research. To bridge this gap in the literature, this article develops a theoretical framework to analyse global scientific controversies surrounding research in China. The framework highlights the existence of four overlapping discursive arenas: China's national public sphere and national expert sphere, the transnational public sphere and the transnational expert sphere. It then examines the struggles over inclusion/exclusion and publicity within these spheres as well as the within- and across-sphere effects of such struggles. Empirically, the article analyses the human genome editing controversy surrounding research conducted by scientists in China between 2015 and 2019. It shows how elite scientists negotiated expert–public relationships within and across the national and transnational expert spheres, how unexpected disruption at the nexus of the four spheres disrupted expert–public relationships as envisioned by elite experts, and how the Chinese state intervened to redraw the boundary between openness and secrecy at both national and transnational levels.

scholarly journals Securitising Covid-19? The Politics of Global Health and the Limits of the Copenhagen School

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 235-257
Author(s):  
Daniel Edler Duarte ◽  
Marcelo M. Valença
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Control Strategies ◽  
Security Studies ◽  
Health Security ◽  
Critical Security Studies ◽  
Scientific Controversies ◽  
Copenhagen School ◽  
State Surveillance ◽  
Critical Approaches ◽  
The One

Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic has sparked controversies over health security strategies adopted in different countries. The urge to curb the spread of the virus has supported policies to restrict mobility and to build up state surveillance, which might induce authoritarian forms of government. In this context, the Copenhagen School has offered an analytical repertoire that informs many analyses in the fields of critical security studies and global health. Accordingly, the securitisation of COVID-19 might be necessary to deal with the crisis, but it risks unfolding discriminatory practices and undemocratic regimes, with potentially enduring effects. In this article, we look into controversies over pandemic-control strategies to discuss the political and analytical limitations of securitisation theory. On the one hand, we demonstrate that the focus on moments of rupture and exception conceals security practices that unfold in ongoing institutional disputes and over the construction of legitimate knowledge about public health. On the other hand, we point out that securitisation theory hinders a genealogy of modern apparatuses of control and neglects violent forms of government which are manifested not in major disruptive acts, but in the everyday dynamics of unequal societies. We conclude by suggesting that an analysis of the bureaucratic disputes and scientific controversies that constitute health security knowledges and practices enables critical approaches to engage with the multiple – and, at times, mundane – processes in which (in)security is produced, circulated, and contested.

scholarly journals The Subtleties of Dissolution and Regeneration of Cellulose: Breaking and Making Hydrogen Bonds

BioResources ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 3811-3814 ◽  
Author(s):  
Björn Lindman ◽  
Bruno Medronho
Keyword(s):  
Hydrogen Bonding ◽  
Hydrogen Bonds ◽  
Hydrophobic Interactions ◽  
Cellulose Dissolution ◽  
Solution Behavior ◽  
Current Discussion ◽  
Scientific Controversies ◽  
A Current

Cellulose dissolution and regeneration are old topics that have recently gained renewed attention. This is reflected in both applications – earlier and novel – and in scientific controversies. There is a current discussion in the literature on the balance between hydrogen bonding and hydrophobic interactions in controlling the solution behavior of cellulose. Some of the key ideas are recalled.

Mass culture: the Victorian world picture

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Horrall
Keyword(s):  
Mass Culture ◽  
Popular Theatre ◽  
Illustrated Books ◽  
For Profit ◽  
World Picture ◽  
Freak Shows ◽  
Scientific Controversies ◽  
Mass Public ◽  
History Of ◽  
Scientific Ideas

This chapter explores aspects of nineteenth-century popular culture that contributed to the emergence of the cave man character. References are made to previous works from history, cultural and literary studies and the history of science. These show how long-standing ideas about the earth’s history were challenged by geological, archaeological and paleontological evidence of ancient and extinct mammals, dinosaurs and hominids. Elite ideas were popularised for a mass public by scientists themselves, and through evolutionary freak shows that exploited scientific controversies for profit. Increasingly, scientific ideas were generalised and disseminated by mass-market, heavily illustrated books and magazines. A new style of comic magazine introduced ‘cartoons’ which poked gentle fun at current sensations, as did an emerging entertainment industry centred on music hall, pantomime and other forms of popular theatre. New steam-powered transportation meant that books, magazines and performers travelled farther and faster than ever before. Britain was the hub of this new mass culture, both spreading and receiving ideas through a continuous, reciprocal dialogue with the emerging empire and America.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document