Essay on the self-presentation of a scientist:
Pick an autobiographical statement by a scientist and analyse it in light of the readings and lectures thus far.
The goal of this assignment is to ascertain how scientists present themselves, the nature of science, and the characteristics of the scientific community. In particular, I ask you to assess whether, how, and to what extent the themes discussed during the lectures and readings are present in the autobiography of, or interview with, the scientist of your choice.
There are two parts to this assignment, which are equally important.
A. Describe and analyse how scientists use the following themes in their descriptions of themselves and the nature of science, but only if it is relevant and helps to clarify the position of your scientist of choice:
The Mertonian norms of science (universalism, “communism”, disinterestedness, and organised skepticism). Does the scientist of your choice refer to these norms? What role do they play in the scientist’s account? How does the scientist describe his or her own character and personality as a scientist, or the character and personality of famous role models and mentors? To what extent is your scientist a model Mertonian? Mitroff’s counter-norms (passionate commitment, particularism, secrecy, and dogmatism). Does the scientist of your choice refer to these counter-norms? What role do they play in his or her account? Is your scientist a model Mitroffian? Mulkay’s central motivations of scientists (acquiring a reputation, credit, recognition, and funds for research, which are the result of publishing high-standard and path-breaking articles). How and to what extent are these motives present in your scientist? The use of rhetoric and the role of interests, according to Mulkay. The mechanisms of science according to Actor-Network Theory. Boundary construction and maintenance, according to Gieryn.
B. Explain why your scientist uses these particular modes of self-description. Does s/he consider him or herself an insider or an outsider? Your scientist may be an eminent scientist or a practitioner of somewhat lesser fame, but does this influence their view of themselves and their profession?
Your paper should not read like a check-list; focus on what you consider are the most important features in the account of your scientist. Your paper will be assessed both for determining the extent to which the presence of the mentioned themes are present, as well as for analysing the rhetorical function of these themes in your scientist’s account.