《20世纪迷失了的科学》.docVIP

MISREADING SCIENCE IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY Instances of fraud and misconduct in science, along with debates regarding the nature of science and scientific practice, have led to some challenges in the reading of scientific texts. Applying the frameworks of reception theory and reader-response criticism is helpful in understanding the variations in the readings of the texts, as well as the reasons for the differing readings. The textual aspect of scientific communication illustrates both the realist and the social elements of scientific practice and the problems for reception presented by the complex dynamics of communicating scientific work. The title of this article may seem to advocate a rather deterministic position with regard to texts and reading. In actuality, the intention of the article is to point to certain kinds of indeterminacy that render any study of reading and texts both interesting and problematic. Scientific texts are not of the same kind as literary texts; the authors purposes are necessarily at odds in the process of composition and in intended reception. Much of the theoretical stance regarding the reading of literary texts presents challenges for a study of the reading of scientific texts. The one thing that both kinds of expression have in common is their textual nature and the accompanying psychological elements of reading that together complete a process of reception. It is common for reception theory and/or reader-response criticism to be applied to the analysis of literary works and their audiences. It is far less common for these modes of examination to be applied to other kinds of formal communication, although any study of the reading and reception of formal communication can benefit from application of these frameworks. This particular examination will benefit from the frameworks as a way to delve into the reading of some recent scientific communication. Specifically, this study will focus on the impact of two categories discourse: