We live in a society exquisitely dependent upon science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology.

Carl Sagan

Introduction

Our first objective in Unit One is to explore relationships among science, technology, and society. To provide some structure to meeting this objective, we will review the book, Science, Technology, and Society, written by Andrew Webster. You are not required to read Webster's book. This section and the one that follows it will outline the principles we need to learn.


Compass

    Key Questions

      How do science and technology affect the well-being of social systems?

    Examples

      Based upon the materials shown in the example web pages for the sampler technologies (or, if you wish, other web-based materials on these technologies), do you think the sampler technologies are being "oversold" to the public? Will the public loose confidence in these technologies when their flaws are revealed?

      Are proponents and opponents of the sampler technologies being fully honest in their presentations? Should proponents and opponents be fully honest? Do they need to be?

      How do social institutions and public policies affect science and technology?

      Is the American public sufficiently informed about science and technology to make a valuable contribution to technology policy?

      Should the public be concerned that institutions such as Iowa State University have sold themselves out to commercial interests? Can you site instances that lead you to believe that research conducted at ISU is biased in favor of commercial interests?

      What can scientists do to give the public more confidence in the integrity of their research?

      Does American society have adequate control over the sampler technologies? How can science and technology development be controlled? Should a society even attempt to control advances in pure science?


Overview of Webster's Science, Technology, and Society

Andrew Webster examines how the economic, cultural, and political features of society affect and are affected by science and technology. He points out differences in popular images of science and the actual practice of science as it is conducted at research institutions and in the private sector. Webster highlights the ways in which scientific facts reflect "invention" as much as they do "discovery." He points out ways in which science and technology can be exploited for societal goals, keeping in mind that the setting of societal goals relies upon political and economic relationships among citizens. Webster ends his book by offering some suggestions for controlling science and technology to maximize benefits to the most persons possible.

Webster is writing from the perspective of a citizen living in a democratic society. This course assumes the same. That is, it assumes that citizens have legal protections sufficient to enable them to critique new technologies and provide input regarding technology policy.

Science in the Real World
Webster introduces us to the Discovery Dome, an exhibit he visited that emphases a hands-on approach to understanding how technology works. Webster points out that this emphasis might increase awareness and appreciation of technology and perhaps reduce fears of it. But real understanding of technology, which can lead to a better understanding of technological risks, requires also an understanding of how science works.

Typically, scientific method is presented as asocial, apolitical, non-economic, expert, progressive, and so forth. Such an approach furthers the image of science as being objective, pure, beyond the realm of people and their failings, and devoted only to making all of our lives better. The problem with presenting such an image, however, is that while it seeks to increase confidence in science, particularly in comparison with other methods of knowledge acquisition, it sets unattainable expectations that lead to diminished public confidence when science and technology inevitably are revealed to be flawed.

No scientific research is perfect and all technology is flawed in some respects. The paradox of science, therefore, is that attempts to present it as infallible inevitably erode confidence in it. Understanding this paradox provides us with insights for developing strategies for gaining adoption of complex and controversial technology, topics to be explored later in this course. That is, change agents, persons seeking to gain adoption of an innovation, are faced with the dilemma of presenting a technology as safe and beneficial without overselling it, knowing that, inevitably, the technology is flawed and will bring undesirable consequences to some segments of the population.

Active Citizens
Webster argues that science is socially constructed. By this he means that science is not an objective, value-free pursuit of knowledge guided solely by theoretical propositions. Instead, the enterprise of science--which questions get asked, which research gets funded, how research is conducted, how findings are interpreted--is dependent upon negotiation and debate among scientists and between scientists and the public. Scientists tend to pursue questions of more immediate interest to the public, with greater potential for lucrative patents, or that are more popular among funding agencies. In short, science is an enterprise as much influenced by social, political, and economic vested interests as any other human enterprise within a democratic society.

If Webster is correct in his assertion that science is negotiated, then citizens must be aware of their influence on science and their responsibility to help guide science to produce the kind of technology best suited to their society's well-being. If, indeed, science and technology are socially constructed and reflect socioeconomic and political interests, then science policy--the decision-making regarding what types of science and technology will be funded by the public--becomes central to a society seeking to use the very powerful tools of science to produce technology for the common good.


Application in Context

    Have the potential benefits of genetic engineering been oversold to the public?
    1. From your reading of the Sampler materials, and other information you know about genetic engineering, do you think the public has been adequately informed about both the benefits and potential problems associated with this technology?
    2. Do you think proponents and opponents of genetic engineering have been fully honest with the public?
    3. Do proponents and opponents have an obligation to be fully honest with the public?
    4. What actions should/can active citizens take to learn the facts about genetic modification of food?


Science and Science Policy
By their very nature, the uncertainties of innovative technology make it difficult for such decisions to be made. Thus, because most efforts of science policy are directed toward technology transfer, questions about how innovations are encouraged, measured, and evaluated are a crucial element of science policy.

Science policy typically assumes that:
  1. technology is independent of social (meaning cultural, economic, political) context,
  2. scientists (experts) also are authorities on correct science policy,
  3. technology can be objectively evaluated in any social context, and
  4. science must be held accountable to the public.
Each of these assumptions has its shortcomings.
  1. Because technology is embedded within a social context, it is influenced by social, political, and economic interests and its transfer from one social system to another can be problematic.
  2. Expert opinion regarding the production of technology does not necessarily imply expert opinion regarding the use and transfer of technology.
  3. Evaluation of technology is exceedingly difficult, and depends upon a wide range of indicators, including ones outside the domain of science (e.g., is legalized abortion moral?).
Problems related to technology transfer and evaluation, therefore, make it difficult to determine how and to what extent science and technology have met public needs.

Society and Science Policy

Webster takes note of an emerging emphasis on the commercialization of public sector research and development. Public universities are being encouraged to enter into cooperative agreements with the private sector to develop and transfer technology with national and international commercial potential. The role of the state and commercial interests in setting science policy has always been a concern of scientists, even though they often benefit from national policy objectives and technology transfer to the commercial sector. Webster discusses three concerns that have been voiced about this trend by scientists conducting research in public universities:
  1. To what extent will commercial interests manipulate the direction and focus of scientific research?
  2. Will the conditions of work and the relationships among scholars change with increased emphasis upon meeting the needs of the commercial sector?
  3. What impact will commercialization have on the free access to and exchange of information, data, materials, and findings among scientists?

The Public and Science Policy

Controlling science is an exceptionally difficult task; who or what is to be controlled for what purposes? To what extent should the public be involved in setting the directions and scope of science? The public's involvement in setting national research priorities requires public knowledge of not just the content of science, but the institution of science as well. Thus, knowledge of content is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for deciding wise science policy (and it is very difficult to educate the public about complex technologies).

The media plays a very important role in shaping public opinion. Traditionally, the media has portrayed the institution of science as authoritative, objective, unbiased, and so forth. But with increasing public concern over the risks associated with advanced technology, and increased attention directed toward the shortcomings of technology, the media has taken a more critical look at both the content and practice of science. In turn, the public has become more skeptical of science and technology.

Pressure groups tend to focus on a single technology or scientific theory for the purpose of challenging the value of science in building a good society. This type of challenge to science typically takes the form of public debate and confrontations between the citizen groups and representatives of the scientific community or business leaders with vested interests in a specific technology.

Sometimes public pressure can have significant effects on the direction and outputs of science. The movement toward the development and dissemination of appropriate technology in developing nations, for example, has dramatically affected research and outreach worldwide.

The alternative science movement attempts to institutionalize alternative approaches to science to maintain an emphasis on critical evaluation of established research and development organizations. Feminist and religious organizations, to name two examples, attempt to redirect approaches taken by scientific institutions in recruiting scholars, setting research priorities, and developing technology.

Webster concludes that the public, through various forms of advocacy groups, can exert significant influences on scientific institutions and the content of science, including the formulation of what is considered to be scientific facts.


Application in Context

    Has Iowa "Sold Itself Out" to Corporate Farming?
    1. The state of Iowa is making large investments into biotechnology. And the Republican and Democratic candidates for Governor support increasing investments in biotechnology. At the same time, the legislature cut funding from the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture by 86 percent. Has Iowa "sold itself out" corporate farming?
    2. Has Iowa State University "sold itself out" to large, corporate interests?


Policy Recommendations

Webster reminds us of the inherent connections among science, technology, and society. He points out that science is a human enterprise and thus is influenced by social, political, and economic interests. He encourages citizens living in a country ruled by democratic processes to be active--to become aware of and involved in science and technology policy formation. He urges us to recognize some general principles of science and technology development. Science can be neither objective nor infallible. It is necessary, therefore, for active citizens in a democratic society to take the responsibility for the ownership of science and technology development.

In addition to these recommendations for citizens, Webster suggests five directions for the social science research on science. Webster suggests that social scientists should pay greater attention to:
  1. the 'political economy' of the scientific laboratory,
  2. the organization and culture of private sector research and development,
  3. the impact of public interest groups on science and technology,
  4. integrating other social sciences into the sociology of science, and
  5. building linkages between the sociology of science and public policy makers who influence the direction of science and technology.
Go Back to Previous Page Go Forward to Next Page Go to the Home Page Go to the Reading Assignments Page