Class 6: Understanding Science

What is science? It looks like there are no easy answers. We came up with a range of descriptions, from 'falsification' to 'furthering humanity's endeavours'. We're not the only ones to struggle for a definition: philosophers and scientists have been trying to agree on a good one since science began. Having talked to people with some experience of working in science, we might start to see a reason for this. People's experiences - in UROP or YII - can be very different.

But one thing that did seem to be important in all of their experiences was community. Scientists - usually - work in groups or in close contact with one another. Sociologists of science Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar, and the philosopher Thomas Kuhn, also saw science as a social process. Trust is necessary and new scientists are 'socialised' into the processes and practices of science. But if science is like this it is a 'subjective' process, and science's authority in society rests on it being objective; the ultimate way of knowing. What does this mean for science?

We talked about the Science Wars (the fights that broke out between social constructivists and 'realist' scientists) and what all this might mean for us as communicators. It might help us in terms of content: perhaps it's more important for us to tell people about the process of science than its 'facts'? Ultimately I think it will help us be humble, as well - if science is liable to revision, contingent and based on trust then we should acknowledge this, along with the fact that there can be other forms of uncertain, trust-based knowledge.

What do you think?