Abstract

Reflecting the dangers of irresponsible science and technology, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein quickly became a mythic story that still feels fresh and relevant in the twenty-first century. The unique framework of the Frankenstein myth has permeated the public discourse about science and knowledge, creating various misconceptions around and negative expectations for scientists and for scientific enterprises more generally. Using the Frankenstein myth as an imaginative tool, we interviewed twelve scientists to explore how this science narrative shapes their views and perceptions of science. Our results yielded two main conclusions. First, the Frankenstein myth may help scientists identify popular concerns about their work and offer a framework for constructing a more positive narrative. Second, finding optimistic science narratives may allow scientists to build a better relationship with the public. We argue that by showing the ethical principles and social dimensions of their work, scientists could replace a negative Frankenstein narrative with a more optimistic one.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-14
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Bioethical Inquiry
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Mar 10 2018

Fingerprint

myth
narrative
science
twenty-first century
Technology
discourse

Keywords

  • Frankenstein myth
  • Identity
  • Responsibility
  • Science ethics
  • Science narratives

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Health Policy

Cite this

The Enduring Influence of a Dangerous Narrative : How Scientists Can Mitigate the Frankenstein Myth. / Nagy, Peter; Wylie, Ruth; Eschrich, Joey; Finn, Edward.

In: Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 10.03.2018, p. 1-14.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{cf0fd266378743ff8f7876e111b4e60c,
title = "The Enduring Influence of a Dangerous Narrative: How Scientists Can Mitigate the Frankenstein Myth",
abstract = "Reflecting the dangers of irresponsible science and technology, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein quickly became a mythic story that still feels fresh and relevant in the twenty-first century. The unique framework of the Frankenstein myth has permeated the public discourse about science and knowledge, creating various misconceptions around and negative expectations for scientists and for scientific enterprises more generally. Using the Frankenstein myth as an imaginative tool, we interviewed twelve scientists to explore how this science narrative shapes their views and perceptions of science. Our results yielded two main conclusions. First, the Frankenstein myth may help scientists identify popular concerns about their work and offer a framework for constructing a more positive narrative. Second, finding optimistic science narratives may allow scientists to build a better relationship with the public. We argue that by showing the ethical principles and social dimensions of their work, scientists could replace a negative Frankenstein narrative with a more optimistic one.",
keywords = "Frankenstein myth, Identity, Responsibility, Science ethics, Science narratives",
author = "Peter Nagy and Ruth Wylie and Joey Eschrich and Edward Finn",
year = "2018",
month = "3",
day = "10",
doi = "10.1007/s11673-018-9846-9",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1--14",
journal = "Journal of Bioethical Inquiry",
issn = "1176-7529",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Enduring Influence of a Dangerous Narrative

T2 - How Scientists Can Mitigate the Frankenstein Myth

AU - Nagy, Peter

AU - Wylie, Ruth

AU - Eschrich, Joey

AU - Finn, Edward

PY - 2018/3/10

Y1 - 2018/3/10

N2 - Reflecting the dangers of irresponsible science and technology, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein quickly became a mythic story that still feels fresh and relevant in the twenty-first century. The unique framework of the Frankenstein myth has permeated the public discourse about science and knowledge, creating various misconceptions around and negative expectations for scientists and for scientific enterprises more generally. Using the Frankenstein myth as an imaginative tool, we interviewed twelve scientists to explore how this science narrative shapes their views and perceptions of science. Our results yielded two main conclusions. First, the Frankenstein myth may help scientists identify popular concerns about their work and offer a framework for constructing a more positive narrative. Second, finding optimistic science narratives may allow scientists to build a better relationship with the public. We argue that by showing the ethical principles and social dimensions of their work, scientists could replace a negative Frankenstein narrative with a more optimistic one.

AB - Reflecting the dangers of irresponsible science and technology, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein quickly became a mythic story that still feels fresh and relevant in the twenty-first century. The unique framework of the Frankenstein myth has permeated the public discourse about science and knowledge, creating various misconceptions around and negative expectations for scientists and for scientific enterprises more generally. Using the Frankenstein myth as an imaginative tool, we interviewed twelve scientists to explore how this science narrative shapes their views and perceptions of science. Our results yielded two main conclusions. First, the Frankenstein myth may help scientists identify popular concerns about their work and offer a framework for constructing a more positive narrative. Second, finding optimistic science narratives may allow scientists to build a better relationship with the public. We argue that by showing the ethical principles and social dimensions of their work, scientists could replace a negative Frankenstein narrative with a more optimistic one.

KW - Frankenstein myth

KW - Identity

KW - Responsibility

KW - Science ethics

KW - Science narratives

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85043392444&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85043392444&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11673-018-9846-9

DO - 10.1007/s11673-018-9846-9

M3 - Article

C2 - 29525895

AN - SCOPUS:85043392444

SP - 1

EP - 14

JO - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

JF - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

SN - 1176-7529

ER -