Lack of scientific dabbling in politics and media

Mark David Drapeau, Ph.D.

A recently published book by journalist Chris Mooney presents the viewpoint that science has been misrepresented, suppressed, and abused by Republicans during the last decade. Whether this is accurate or not is irrelevant, because there is currently a one-sided battle for the hearts and minds of Americans as regards science and technology.

Professional academic scientists generally shun public involvement in the national debate over important scientific issues such as stem-cell research and the teaching of intelligent design in schools. This washing-of-hands is exemplified by a recent interview with Kathleen K. Smith, a Professor of Biology at Duke University, and the new Director of the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center. When asked how the “intelligent design challenge” should be met, she responded that intelligent design (ID) was not a viewpoint based on merits or principles, and that,

“…my experience is that the ID discussion is carried out using political and courtroom tactics rather than intellectual tactics – the sort of thing you see on the evening news…That’s not a level at which you can have an intellectual discussion.”

The efficiency with which Dr. Smith insults and dismisses politicians, lobbyists, lawyers, judges, and the media is impressive!

Professionals who take advantage of a variety of methods to communicate their views are not blithering idiots to be summarily dismissed because they are not elitistly communicating on an “intellectual level”. They operate in the real world, fully understanding that the public is unlikely to be highly educated on even the most pressing issues. Far savvier than scientists, they know how to frame their views so that they can successfully package complex technical issues into soundbites.

If scientists are to engage an audience that doesn’t live in ivory towers behind ivy walls, being proactive and engaging is critical, since it is much harder to re-frame an issue than to be the initial framer of it. Political strategists instinctively know this; why don't scientists?

With a general lack of engagement by evolutionary biologists with the average citizen, they should not be surprised that a recent national survey by the Pew Research Center found that only 26% of Americans believed that life on Earth has evolved over time by means of natural selection. Are scientists satisfied with this, resigned to discussing ideas amongst themselves in relative isolation? The world is run by those who show up.

Further reading:

Beardsley, T. M. (2006). Kathleen K. Smith: Integrating the levels of evolution. BioScience, 56, 470-474.

Mooney, C. (2005). The Republican War on Science. Basic Books, NY.

Nisbet, M. C. (2006). http://scienceblogs.com/framing-science/

Mark David Drapeau is currently a neuroscientist and geneticist at New York University in New York, NY. In September 2006, he will begin a one-year AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellowship in Washington, D.C. He has a B.S. in Biology from the University of Rochester and a Ph.D. in Biological Sciences from the University of California, Irvine.