Rhetoric & Technical Communication
Rhetoric & Technical Communication
Toscano, Aaron, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Dept. of English

Resources and Daily Activities

  • Conference Presentations
    • Critical Theory/MRG 2023 Presentation
    • PCA/ACA Conference Presentation 2022
    • PCAS/ACAS Presentation 2021
    • SEACS 2021 Presentation
    • SEACS 2022 Presentation
    • SEACS 2023 Presentation
    • South Atlantic MLA Conference 2022
  • Dr. Toscano’s Homepage
  • ENGL 2116-014: Introduction to Technical Communication
    • February 13th: Introduction to User Design
    • February 15th: Instructions for Users
      • Making Résumés and Cover Letters More Effective
    • February 1st: Reflection on Workplace Messages
    • February 20th: The Rhetoric of Technology
    • February 22nd: Social Constructions of Technology
    • February 6th: Plain Language
    • January 11th: More Introduction to Class
    • January 18th: Audience & Purpose
    • January 23rd: Résumés and Cover Letters
      • Duty Format for Résumés
      • Peter Profit’s Cover Letter
    • January 25th: More on Résumés and Cover Letters
    • January 30th: Achieving a Readable Style
      • Euphemisms
      • Prose Practice for Next Class
      • Prose Revision Assignment
      • Revising Prose: Efficiency, Accuracy, and Good
      • Sentence Clarity
    • January 9th: Introduction to the Class
    • Major Assignments
    • March 13th: Introduction to Information Design
    • March 15th: More on Information Design
    • March 20th: Reporting Technical Information
    • March 27th: The Great I, Robot Analysis
  • ENGL 4182/5182: Information Design & Digital Publishing
    • August 21st: Introduction to the Course
      • Rhetorical Principles of Information Design
    • August 28th: Introduction to Information Design
      • Prejudice and Rhetoric
      • Robin Williams’s Principles of Design
    • Classmates Webpages (Fall 2017)
    • December 4th: Presentations
    • Major Assignments for ENGL 4182/5182 (Fall 2017)
    • November 13th: More on Color
      • Designing with Color
      • Important Images
    • November 20th: Extra-Textual Elements
    • November 27th: Presentation/Portfolio Workshop
    • November 6th: In Living Color
    • October 16th: Type Fever
      • Typography
    • October 23rd: More on Type
    • October 2nd: MIDTERM FUN!!!
    • October 30th: Working with Graphics
      • Beerknurd Calendar 2018
    • September 11th: Talking about Design without Using “Thingy”
      • Theory, theory, practice
    • September 18th: The Whole Document
    • September 25th: Page Design
  • ENGL 4183/5183: Editing with Digital Technologies
    • August 24th: Introduction to the Class
    • August 31st: Rhetoric, Words, and Composing
    • Major Assignments for ENGL 4183/5183 (Fall 2022)
      • Rhetoric of Fear
    • November 16th: Voice and Other Nebulous Writing Terms
      • Finding Dominant Rhetorical Appeals
    • November 2nd: Rhetorical Effects of Punctuation
    • November 30th: Words and Word Classes
    • November 9th: Cohesive Rhythm
    • October 12th: Choosing Adjectivals
    • October 19th: Choosing Nominals
    • October 26th: Stylistic Variations
    • October 5th: Midterm Exam
    • September 14th: Verb is the Word!
    • September 21st: Coordination and Subordination
    • September 28th: Form and Function
    • September 7th: Sentence Patterns
  • ENGL 4275: Rhetoric of Technology
    • April 13th: Authorities in Science and Technology
    • April 15th: Articles on Violence in Video Games
    • April 20th: Presentations
    • April 6th: Technology in the home
    • April 8th: Writing Discussion
    • Assignments for ENGL 4275
    • February 10th: Religion of Technology Part 3 of 3
    • February 12th: Is Love a Technology?
    • February 17th: Technology and Gender
    • February 19th: Technology and Expediency
    • February 24th: Semester Review
    • February 3rd: Religion of Technology Part 1 of 3
    • February 5th: Religion of Technology Part 2 of 3
    • January 13th: Technology and Meaning, a Humanist perspective
    • January 15th: Technology and Democracy
    • January 22nd: The Politics of Technology
    • January 27th: Discussion on Writing as Thinking
    • January 29th: Technology and Postmodernism
    • January 8th: Introduction to the Course
    • March 11th: Writing and Other Fun
    • March 16th: Neuromancer (1984) Day 1 of 2
    • March 18th: Neuromancer (1984) Day 2 of 2
    • March 23rd: Inception (2010)
    • March 25th: Writing and Reflecting Discussion
    • March 30th & April 1st: Count Zero
    • March 9th: William Gibson’s Neuromancer (1984)
  • ENGL 6166: Rhetorical Theory
    • April 12th: Knoblauch. Ch. 4 and Ch. 5
    • April 19th: Jacques Derrida’s Positions
    • April 26th:  Feminisms and Rhetorics
    • April 5th: Knoblauch. Ch. 3 and More Constitutive Rhetoric
    • February 15th: Isocrates (Part 2)
    • February 1st: Aristotle’s On Rhetoric Books 2 & 3
      • Aristotle’s On Rhetoric, Book 2
      • Aristotle’s On Rhetoric, Book 3
    • February 22nd: St. Augustine’s On Christian Doctrine [Rhetoric]
    • February 8th: Isocrates (Part 1)-2nd Half of Class
    • January 11th: Introduction to Class
    • January 18th: Plato’s Phaedrus
    • January 25th: Aristotle’s On Rhetoric Book 1
    • March 15th: Descartes, Rene, Discourse on Method
    • March 1st: Knoblauch. Ch. 1 and 2
    • March 22nd: Mary Wollstonecraft
    • March 29th: Second Wave Feminist Rhetoric
    • May 3rd: Knoblauch. Ch. 6, 7, and “Afterword”
    • Rhetorical Theory Assignments
  • ENGL/COMM/WRDS: The Rhetoric of Fear
    • February 14th: Fascism and Other Valentine’s Day Atrocities
    • February 21st: Fascism Part 2
    • February 7th: Fallacies Part 3 and American Politics Part 2
    • January 10th: Introduction to the Class
    • January 17th: Scapegoats & Conspiracies
    • January 24th: The Rhetoric of Fear and Fallacies Part 1
    • January 31st: Fallacies Part 2 and American Politics Part 1
    • Major Assignments
    • March 7th: Fascism Part 3
  • LBST 2212-124, 125, 126, & 127
    • August 21st: Introduction to Class
    • August 23rd: Humanistic Approach to Science Fiction
    • August 26th: Robots and Zombies
    • August 28th: Futurism, an Introduction
    • August 30th: R. A. Lafferty “Slow Tuesday Night” (1965)
    • December 2nd: Technological Augmentation
    • December 4th: Posthumanism
    • November 11th: Salt Fish Girl (Week 2)
    • November 13th: Salt Fish Girl (Week 2 con’t)
    • November 18th: The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (Part 1)
      • More Questions than Answers
    • November 1st: Games Reality Plays (part II)
    • November 20th: The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (Part 2)
    • November 6th: Salt Fish Girl (Week 1)
    • October 14th: More Autonomous Fun
    • October 16th: Autonomous Conclusion
    • October 21st: Sci Fi in the Domestic Sphere
    • October 23rd: Social Aphasia
    • October 25th: Dust in the Wind
    • October 28th: Gender Liminality and Roles
    • October 2nd: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein
    • October 30th: Games Reality Plays (part I)
    • October 9th: Approaching Autonomous
      • Analyzing Prose in Autonomous
    • September 11th: The Time Machine
    • September 16th: The Alien Other
    • September 18th: Post-apocalyptic Worlds
    • September 20th: Dystopian Visions
    • September 23rd: World’s Beyond
    • September 25th: Gender Studies and Science Fiction
    • September 30th: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein
    • September 4th: Science Fiction and Social Breakdown
      • More on Ellison
      • More on Forster
    • September 9th: The Time Machine
  • LBST 2213-110: Science, Technology, and Society
    • August 22nd: Science and Technology from a Humanistic Perspective
    • August 24th: Science and Technology, a Humanistic Approach
    • August 29th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 2
    • August 31st: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 3 and 4
    • December 5th: Video Games and Violence, a more nuanced view
    • November 14th: Boulle, Pierre. Planet of the Apes. (1964) Ch. 27-end
    • November 16th: Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. 1818. Preface-Ch. 8
    • November 21st: Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. 1818. Ch. 9-Ch. 16
    • November 28th: Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Ch. 17-Ch. 24
    • November 30th: Violence in Video Games
    • November 7th: Boulle, Pierre. Planet of the Apes Ch. 1-17
    • November 9th: Boulle, Pierre. Planet of the Apes, Ch. 18-26
    • October 12th: Lies Economics Tells
    • October 17th: Brief Histories of Medicine, Salerno, and Galen
    • October 19th: Politicizing Science and Medicine
    • October 24th: COVID-19 Facial Covering Rhetoric
    • October 26th: Wells, H. G. Time Machine. Ch. 1-5
    • October 31st: Wells, H. G. The Time Machine Ch. 6-The End
    • October 3rd: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Ch. 7 and Conclusion
    • September 12th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 7 and Conclusion
    • September 19th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Prefaces and Ch. 1
    • September 26th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Ch. 2
    • September 28th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Ch. 5 and 6
    • September 7th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 5 and 6
  • New Media: Gender, Culture, Technology (Spring 2021)
    • April 13th: Virtually ‘Real’ Environments
    • April 20th: Rhetoric/Composition Defines New Media
    • April 27th: Sub/Cultural Politics, Hegemony, and Agency
    • April 6th: Capitalist Realism
    • February 16: Misunderstanding the Internet
    • February 23rd: Our Public Sphere and the Media
    • February 2nd: Introduction to Cultural Studies
    • January 26th: Introduction to New Media
    • Major Assignments for New Media (Spring 2021)
    • March 16th: Identity Politics
    • March 23rd: Social Construction of Gender and Sexuality
    • March 2nd: Foundational Thinkers in Cultural Studies
    • March 30th: Hyperreality
    • March 9th: Globalization & Postmodernism
    • May 4th: Wrapping Up The Semester
      • Jodi Dean “The The Illusion of Democracy” & “Communicative Capitalism”
      • Social Construction of Sexuality
  • Science Fiction in American Culture (Summer I–2020)
    • Assignments for Science Fiction in American Culture
    • Cultural Studies and Science Fiction Films
    • June 10th: Interstellar and Exploration themes
    • June 11th: Bicentennial Man
    • June 15th: I’m Only Human…Or am I?
    • June 16th: Wall-E and Environment
    • June 17th: Wall-E (2008) and Technology
    • June 18th: Interactivity in Video Games
    • June 1st: Firefly (2002) and Myth
    • June 2nd: “Johnny Mnemonic”
    • June 3rd: “New Rose Hotel”
    • June 4th: “Burning Chrome”
    • June 8th: Conformity and Monotony
    • June 9th: Cultural Constructions of Beauty
    • May 18th: Introduction to Class
    • May 19th: American Culture, an Introduction
    • May 20th: The Matrix
    • May 21st: Gender and Science Fiction
    • May 25th: Goals for I, Robot
    • May 26th: Isaac Asimov’s I, Robot
    • May 27th: Hackers and Slackers
    • May 30th: Inception
  • Teaching Portfolio
  • Topics for Analysis
    • A Practical Editing Situation
    • American Culture, an Introduction
    • Efficiency in Writing Reviews
    • Feminism, An Introduction
    • Fordism/Taylorism
    • Frankenstein Part I
    • Frankenstein Part II
    • Futurism Introduction
    • How to Lie with Statistics
    • Isaac Asimov’s “A Cult of Ignorance”
    • Langdon Winner Summary: The Politics of Technology
    • Marxist Theory (cultural analysis)
    • Oral Presentations
    • Oratory and Argument Analysis
    • Our Public Sphere
    • Postmodernism Introduction
    • Protesting Confederate Place
    • Punctuation Refresher
    • QT, the Existential Robot
    • Religion of Technology Discussion
    • Rhetoric, an Introduction
      • Analyzing the Culture of Technical Writer Ads
      • Rhetoric of Technology
      • Visual Culture
      • Visual Perception
      • Visual Perception, Culture, and Rhetoric
      • Visual Rhetoric
      • Visuals for Technical Communication
      • World War I Propaganda
    • The Great I, Robot Discussion
      • I, Robot Short Essay Topics
    • The Rhetoric of Video Games: A Cultural Perspective
      • Civilization, an Analysis
    • The Sopranos
    • Why Science Fiction?
    • Zombies and Consumption Satire
  • Video Games & American Culture
    • April 14th: Phallocentrism
    • April 21st: Video Games and Neoliberalism
    • April 7th: Video Games and Conquest
    • Assignments for Video Games & American Culture
    • February 10th: Aesthetics and Culture
    • February 17th: Narrative and Catharsis
    • February 24th: Serious Games
    • February 3rd: More History of Video Games
    • January 13th: Introduction to the course
    • January 20th: Introduction to Video Game Studies
    • January 27th: Games & Culture
      • Marxism for Video Game Analysis
      • Postmodernism for Video Game Analysis
    • March 24th: Realism, Interpretation(s), and Meaning Making
    • March 31st: Feminist Perspectives and Politics
    • March 3rd: Risky Business?

Contact Me

Office: Fretwell 255F
Email: atoscano@uncc.edu
LBST 2213-110: Science, Technology, and Society » September 28th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Ch. 5 and 6

September 28th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Ch. 5 and 6

Announcements

  • Spring Break Study Abroad Fair Next Week–Oct. 6th
    • Student Union Lobby
    • 10:30am – 1:30pm
  • Intercultural Communication on the Amalfi Coast (6 credits)
    • May 27, 2023-June 24, 2023
    • Summer Study Abroad Fair (this program) is Tuesday, Nov. 15th
    • Tuesday, November 15
    • Student Union Lobby & Norm’s Gameroom
  • Amalfi Coast Study Abroad 1
  • Amalfi Coast Study Abroad 2
  • More information should be available in a couple weeks

Plan for Today

  • Technological Determinism vs. Social Construction of Technology
  • Move onto Ch. 5 & 6 in Collins & Pinch
  • Midterm Exam is online next week, 10/05
    • Now is a good time to set that calendar reminder…
    • I’ll open it up Tuesday, and you’ll have until Friday, 10/07, 11:00pm

Technological Determinism vs. Social Construction of Technology

Make sure you understand the difference between the two concepts below. This class privileges a social construction of technology point of view.

  • Technological determinism: the idea that a technology is created in a vacuum devoid of social need; often, a lone inventor or team “discovers” a tool that changes social values.
  • Social construction of technology: the idea that society and (usually hegemonic) cultural values drive technological creation; inventors pursue new tools based on their understanding or inspiration from prevailing social ideology.

Although this class privileges social constructions of technology, there is a dialectical relationship to consider. The mobile phone–smart or otherwise–is the latest incarnation of a tool for humans to communicate quickly over vast distances. Humans have pursued communication technologies for millennia. However, these tools do change practices and behaviors, but it’s more complicated than claiming they change values. Our adoption of these tools has changed our expectations: we assume we can get a hold of anyone instantly, we consider the phone a security apparatus, we don’t ask “what are you doing” but “where are you” when the receiver answers, etc. Don’t get me started on people wandering the grocery store (or any store) while glued to their phone…

Chapter 5: “Tidings of Comfort and Joy: Seven Wise Men and the Science of Economics”

One of the keys to understanding this chapter is to understand why it is in a volume purportedly about technology. Throughout the chapter, Collins & Pinch refer to the science of economics. Well, just like a good economist, we can be 95% certain that their reasons have much to do with their definition of technology: the application of science. Economics is a social science, relying heavily on mathematics and statistics to predict human behavior as it relates to financial decisions. Economics is a technology; it is a tool for managing, arguably, the most important aspect of a society—its means of production. Economics, as the plural indicates, isn’t a single tool but a series of tools for managing, predicting, and discussing production and consumption. It’s also an imperfect tool not guided by natural laws; instead, it’s guided by policies mired in experimenter’s regress (“technologist’s regress” as Collins & Pinch mention [p. 141]). With few exceptions on the macro level (the big picture of the economy), econometric modelers (modellers for Collins & Pinch) have no where near an accurate model for the economy. Yet those modelers might be the best ones to put in charge of the economy.

Three Things to Take Away

  1. US Presidents (and Congress for that matter) get more credit and blame than they deserve for what happens in the economy. One’s political standpoint often constructs one’s economic worldview. Politicians use the voters’ biases to garner support for their particular economic policies:
    Cutting taxes, reducing deficits, deregulating “free” markets all seem straightforward when listening to politicians (or economists) in sound bite media.
  2. An economist’s most used expression—“all things being equal”—melts into air because all things are never equal when modeling the outcome of economic behaviors and policies.
  3. Possibly, the experts on economics are the ones who spend so much time modeling, re-modeling, and explaining economic forecasts. That dedication makes them more likely to understand the economy.
    • Maybe a syllogism is appropriate to understand this idea:
      Major Premise: To be an expert in any subject, one must devote time to that subject.
      Minor Premise: Economists dedicate much of their time to forecasting and analyzing economic trends.
      Conclusion: Therefore, economists are experts on the economy.
    • By the way, if you’re interested in all the rhetoric stuff, I’ll be teaching ENGL/COMM/WRDS 4050 “The Rhetoric of Fear” in the Spring. I will be face to face and around 25 students.

What’s implied in the conclusion is that they should be trusted. I don’t want to give the impression that economists don’t know what they’re talking about. However, Collins & Pinch point out that, just like the weather, it’s harder to predict too far into the future.

You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
–Bob Dylan, “Subterranean Homesick Blues”

Check out Bill Phillips’s Hydraulic model of the economy:

  • Pictured with Phillips
  • In a Museum MONIAC

Key quotations

  • p. 124: “[M]acroeconomic modellers…use equations to build a model of the economy.”
  • p. 125: Many, many variables in a full macroeconomic model.
  • p. 126: Consider the “simple” equation for consumption: C= 2/3*Y
    Basically, this means consumers (a household or individual) will spend two-thirds of their income. But then Collins & Pinch complicate it…not so simple an equation.
  • p. 126: Models are based on past events—“the numbers in the equations have to be obtained by looking at how things happened in the past.”
  • p. 127: “[E]xogenous variables include the state of the world economy, the price of oil, undecided government policies, and so forth, all of which are likely to be far more complex to model than the national economy itself.”
    • What makes the price of oil an exogenous variable?
    • What have politicians and forecasters said about the recent drop in oil prices?
    • What do they claim consumers are doing because of the drop?
  • p. 128: There are ranges of possibilities that economists claim to be 95% confident will be presented. They can offer “error bars,” but those “underestimate the true error because [they take] into account only those mistakes which have a well understood statistical pattern.”
    Again, all things being equal.
  • p. 129: “Retrodict” = retrofitting + predicting. “[N]early all the macroeconomic models we have in Britain are successful at predicting the past.”
  • p. 133: “Not only is there no agreement about which models are best, there is no agreement about what it would be to be the best.”
  • p. 140: Who’s to blame? Collins & Pinch point out that “Britton is suggestion that it was not the model but the economy that was wrong.” In other words, Britton’s model was correct, but “the underlying economy had changed.”

Metaphor of the Sea (and Weather in General)

As mentioned on the previous class’s webpage, we describe things through comparison; we compare a common idea to an unfamiliar concept to explain it. Collins & Pinch use the weather and tides to compare to economic forecasts—neither can be accurately predicted but get close the closer (sooner) they are to a prediction. Consider how they can forecast Hurricane Ian’s trajectory, but their predictions aren’t as reliable until the storm is close. Check out the “spaghetti models.” They quote Andrew Britton who claims modelers use their judgment when constructing their models: “intuition…has its place in the sciences and that it’s the people who are intuitive who are successful” (p. 135).

  • p. 136: “[T]here is never any expectation that one is developing the kind of truth, accuracy, and replicability which we expect under the standard model of science.”
  • p. 144: “Weather forecasting and econometric forecasting are similar in that they try to model extremely complex systems with sets of interacting equations.”
  • And, just like a Captain…
    • p. 146: “It may be that macroeconomic modellers, as a result of the prolonged attention to the economy that is required of those who are to have professional credence in the modelling community, know more about the working of economies than most other people.”
    • p. 146-147: “[T]he value of expert advice should be judged on the expertise of the advisors, not on the scientific appearance of their procedures”

The Economic Lessons of The Rhetoric of Technology

Lesson 1: Powerful Forecasters Can Predict, Define, and Shape Simultaneously

  • p. 148: An economist’s “proximity to the markets enables [him or her] to keep a little ahead of those whose information comes to them second-hand.”
  • p. 148: “If you are a powerful forecaster…the more people believe you, the more likely is it that your forecast will come true.”

These powerful forecasters convey the meaning of the models and the economy itself.

The economy runs on our assumptions that exchange is valuable. Money and credit is valuable because we’ve been indoctrinated to believe it’s valuable. We can be certain (well, 95% certain) that most consumers will make rational decisions with their money. If most do that, we can make small predictions based on what we’ve seen in the past. Don’t let ANYONE tell you any economic policy will lead to a definite outcome. We can find empirical examples for when the following policies worked and didn’t work: Cutting taxes leads to growth; increasing taxes reduces the deficit; investing in this will yield high returns. After all, not only do economists state “all things being equal,” but financial planners always warn (even if it’s just in fine print): “past performance is not a predictor of future results.”

There’s also a problem with the “certainty” that people make rational decisions with their money. Americans spend lots of money on gifts during Christmas, but the value for the recipient is much less than what the buyer paid for the gift. More information on that discussion is here. No, seriously, buying gifts is a waste of money. (Those links aren’t required reading, but they might save you money…)

Lesson 2: The Complexity of the Economy is Lost on the Public

We operate and spend money or assume the economy increases or decreases based on ideas from imperfect theories that cannot predict accurate results; therefore, how certain can we be when politicians claim X, Y, or Z will be good or bad for the economy? They aren’t certain, but that doesn’t stop lay audiences from drawing decisive conclusions based on their belief in simple economic truisms. No fact is self-evident, especially, economic “facts.” However, meaning is conveyed by ideas surrounding the economy, a technology. Consider where most people learn economic theories and assumed facts…is it from a textbook or a talking head on TV?

Chapter 6: “The Science of the Lambs: Chernobyl and the Cumbrian Sheep Farmers”

Sheep liver goes well with fava beans and a nice Chianti…

This chapter may also initially seem like it belongs in Collins & Pinch’s first volume on science. However, farming is a technology. We might not see farm animals as technologies, but they have been bred and controlled to yield certain attributes based on market demands. This goes for plants as well. Corn doesn’t grow in nice blocked off areas naturally—it’s been planted, cultivated. And, if you’re interested in how corn came from a wild grain called teosinte, see that link (not required). Likewise, there’s nothing natural about chickens you eat. They didn’t evolve to live in coops on farms. Farming techniques were some of the first tools that came about when humans started living in permanent settlements. What can we say about hunter-gatherer peoples vs. farming peoples? Well, we can read much about their ideologies through the technologies they use, but more on that in a different class (look for ENGL 4275 “The Rhetoric of Technology” in a future semester).

The rhetoric of technology apparent in this chapter revolves around the beliefs and attitudes the lay and quasi-lay publics have about expert opinion. The farmers—rightly and wrongly—concluded that the experts weren’t to be trusted. This mistrust, a serious problem Collins & Pinch feel is a byproduct of Golem science, led farmers to be more susceptible to believe in conspiracy theories. Because these scientists came from the government, the mistrust was compounded. The rhetoric of technology shows us that people draw meaning from technology (and science) based on their own biased filters. If they’re generally distrustful of the government, they might dismiss expert opinion too quickly. This chapter is an example of how the public can lose trust in the experts.

Three Things to Take Away from Ch. 6

  1. All farming—including sheep farming—is a technology.
  2. Can’t treat livestock the same way scientists control for lab experiments. They aren’t rats bred for lab tests.
  3. The rhetoric of technology (or science) extends to the lay public’s beliefs; right or wrong, that conveys meaning, it helps define a technology, regardless of validity.
  4. And a fourth for good measure…
    This chapter is an example of how the public can lose trust in the experts.

Questions to ponder

  1. What are the issues surrounding genetically modified organisms (GMOs)?
  2. What makes a food product able to be marked as “organic”?
  3. How does a report about radiation or radioactivity affect your perception of safety whether it be for food, atmosphere, or something else?
  4. Why do you trust or not trust the governmental organizations responsible for ensuring safety in agricultural and medicinal products? These would be organizations, such as the FDA, USDA, FTC, etc.

Key Quotations

We’ve read about the concerns and problems for showing the existence of the invisible. Because one can’t see radiation, one has to rely on special instruments to detect it. These instruments aren’t household items like thermometers, carbon monoxide detectors, or hard water/pH testing strips. Although there are commercially available Geiger counters, most people don’t go around testing all the elevator buttons they come into contact with. Mostly, the public relies on experts employed by the government to assure them that there aren’t any radiation concerns nearby. The experts report the results of radiation tests (or other environmental tests) by claiming what’s safe or unsafe. They don’t go into detail as to how they derived those results. Depending on the audience’s faith (or lack thereof) in the experts, the public could draw different conclusions. Whether it’s lead or radiation, there are “acceptable levels”—often measured in parts per trillion—of contaminants. Hearing that there are carcinogens in the food we eat can be alarming if the public doesn’t understand how small the amounts are.

I’m sure you’ve been told to avoid chemicals. Well, you can’t. Chemicals are everywhere and chemistry is the study of matter. Even water has a chemical compound, H2O. However, a popular assumption is that when we hear about chemicals, we assume that means pollutants or harmful substances. When confronting a non-expert public, one must choose words carefully.

  • p. 151: Don’t trust milk! “Some citizens took matters into their own hands and refused to buy diary products.”
    How much radiation is allowed in the water and soil in the US?
    How much radiation are we exposed to? (MIT, 5 Jan. 1994)
  • p. 152: Assumption that radiation levels would dissipate in lambs. “The hill lambs were still young and the hope was that the high levels of radiation would decrease naturally before they were taken to market.”
  • p. 153: “[The farmers] were also most unimpressed with the scientists’ arrogance and their vacillating pronouncements. Their faith in scientific expertise was undermined.”
  • p. 154: Predictions were off. “[S]cientists underestimated two aspects of rain-borne radiation.”
  • p. 154: Different soils, different absorptions. “The scientists gave flawed advice because they failed to take into account the special geological conditions in Cumbria.”
  • p. 155: “What particularly dismayed the farmers was the overweening certainty with which the scientists made pronouncements, their refusal to admit mistakes, and to give any credence to the sheepfarmers’ knowledge.”
  • p. 155: Serious problems controlling for variables.
  • p. 156: Scientists didn’t understand sheep behavior to the level of the farmers.
  • p. 162: Farmers lost faith in the experts. They were wrong in one area, so they could be wrong in other areas—especially when the farmers were upset about Sellafield concerns being dismissed.
    “[O]nly about half of the observed radioactive caesium (si-zi-um) came from Chernobyl, with the rest originating in ‘other sources’ such as weapons testing fallout and the 1957 Sellafield fire.”

Farmers Draw Conclusions

  • p. 163: “The farmers were unimpressed by what they saw as scientists’ overconfidence and false certainty.”
  • p. 163: Conspiracy Theory—“[T]he authorities were waiting for Chernobyl to occur in order to give them the perfect excuse to pass off the previous unacknowledged contamination from the Sellafield plant.”
  • p. 163: “[T]he scientists must have fallen victim to political pressure from the government” according to Wynne.
  • p. 164: “[The scientists] made over-confident claims which, in the long term, were unsustainable.”
    Also, think about the dilemma scientists and government are under. They don’t want to alarm citizens or make statements that haven’t been fully vetted. However, as mad as the public could be about a rush to judgment, what might the public think if the experts—after a radiation disaster—claimed they don’t have all the facts in, so they don’t know what’s safe or not?

Lessons from Observing Radiation Outside of a Controlled Lab Setting

  • p. 155: “What no one contemplated was that the caesium might pose an indirect chemical-biological threat by absorption into roots and then ingestion into sheep.”
  • p. 157: Can’t just sell the lambs later. Sheepfarming “runs completely counter to the rigidity of the bureaucratic method for dealing with the crisis” (Wynne, 1989, p. 33)
  • p. 159: “Many local practices and judgments important to hill farming were unknown to experts, who assumed that scientific knowledge could be applied without adjusting to local circumstances.” (Wynne, 1989, p. 34)

More Understanding About (golem) Science Needed

  • p. 164: “Flipping to and fro between science being all about certainty and science being a political conspiracy is an undesirable state of affairs.”
    • Pay particular attention to this situation. Later this semester, we’ll read a few articles about the WHO’s and CDC’s early conflicting advice about the protections facial coverings give for COVID-19.
    • Yes, social distancing and facial coverings are good steps to reduce the spread of COVID-19.
    • What you should hone in on is that when new science issues come out (especially epidemics), it’s hard to expect CERTAINTY when scientists don’t have enough facts or haven’t been able to make enough observations.
    • If the public thinks that means “scientists don’t know anything,” that’s wrong. Scientists need time to observe, test, and report on what they’ve learned:
      Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd. (Voltaire)
  • p. 164: Government as the protector. “In Britain the official response to public health risks has traditionally been paternalistic reassurance. The government judges that the danger of panic usually outweighs any real risk to its citizens.”
  • p. 165: Need a more stable relationship between experts and the public.

Next Class

Keep up with the reading. We’ll be finishing Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large: What You Should Know about Technology on Monday, 10/03. Make sure you do your Canvas post this week by Friday, 09/30, at 11:00pm. Don’t forget, your Midterm Exam is next week–10/05/2021 on Canvas...is that reminder set?

Skip to toolbar
  • Log In