Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists.

Gieryn asserts that scientists are always engaged in an ongoing struggle to establish their field as a science, signaling a legitimate intellectual or technical activity, which they do through rhetorical style. This ongoing struggle is a type of boundary-work since scientists must erect boundaries around their activities in order to place themselves, and their activity, high in a desired hierarchy. These boundaries are neither universal nor permanent, rather, they are, and will continue to be, in flux. There are 3 main strains which are the sources for this flux: 1) the need to adapt to changing external pressures, 2) the diversity of professional ambitions between each scientist, and 3) internal ambiguity resulting “from the simultaneous pursuit of separate professional goals, each requiring a boundary to be built in different ways."

Gieryn’s critique of science itself, proximally implies that science communication, largely a vehicle for the public promotion of science, must engage, even more than science, in this boundary work. This is a stark change from how science communication is usually framed, as the noble activity of bringing the light of truth to the darkness of ignorance. Rather, science communication is a field of rhetoric, tasked with continually restyling science in ways that maintain its prestige and authority. This article helps me define science as an activity in a continual struggle to maintain its prestige by erecting boundaries around itself, beyond which all other activities, labelled as pseudoscience, religion, or other lesser sciences, must be cast. To hold legitimate authority, the scientist must deny all others access to scientific activities. This sheds light on timely heated discussions around participatory science. While most scientists and science communicators agree that broader participation in science would benefit them, science, and the public, it also threatens the necessary exclusivity which places them in a position of authority and secures further access to finite precious resources.

Reference:

Gieryn, T. F. (1983). Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists. American Sociological Review, 48(6), 781–795. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2095325