Abstract

As one of the best known science narratives about the consequences of creating life, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus (1818) is an enduring tale that people know and understand with an almost instinctive familiarity. It has become a myth reflecting people’s ambivalent feelings about emerging science: they are curious about science, but they are also afraid of what science can do to them. In this essay, we argue that the Frankenstein myth has evolved into a stigma attached to scientists that focalizes the public’s as well as the scientific community’s negative reactions towards certain sciences and scientific practices. This stigma produces ambivalent reactions towards scientific artifacts and it leads to negative connotations because it implies that some sciences are dangerous and harmful. We argue that understanding the Frankenstein stigma can empower scientists by helping them revisit their own biases as well as responding effectively to people’s expectations for, and attitudes towards, scientists and scientific artifacts. Debunking the Frankenstein stigma could also allow scientists to reshape their professional identities so they can better show the public what ethical and moral values guide their research enterprises.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-17
Number of pages17
JournalScience and Engineering Ethics
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jun 26 2017

Fingerprint

science
Industry
Artifacts
myth
artifact
Stigma
Emotions
narrative
trend
Research
Values
Ethical values
Familiarity
Professional identity
Moral values

Keywords

  • Frankenstein
  • Identity
  • Science communication
  • Science narratives
  • Science-fiction
  • Stigma

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Issues, ethics and legal aspects
  • Health Policy
  • Management of Technology and Innovation

Cite this

Why Frankenstein is a Stigma Among Scientists. / Nagy, Peter; Wylie, Ruth; Eschrich, Joey; Finn, Edward.

In: Science and Engineering Ethics, 26.06.2017, p. 1-17.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{227b680429d343a782d1bcb980725a0c,
title = "Why Frankenstein is a Stigma Among Scientists",
abstract = "As one of the best known science narratives about the consequences of creating life, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus (1818) is an enduring tale that people know and understand with an almost instinctive familiarity. It has become a myth reflecting people’s ambivalent feelings about emerging science: they are curious about science, but they are also afraid of what science can do to them. In this essay, we argue that the Frankenstein myth has evolved into a stigma attached to scientists that focalizes the public’s as well as the scientific community’s negative reactions towards certain sciences and scientific practices. This stigma produces ambivalent reactions towards scientific artifacts and it leads to negative connotations because it implies that some sciences are dangerous and harmful. We argue that understanding the Frankenstein stigma can empower scientists by helping them revisit their own biases as well as responding effectively to people’s expectations for, and attitudes towards, scientists and scientific artifacts. Debunking the Frankenstein stigma could also allow scientists to reshape their professional identities so they can better show the public what ethical and moral values guide their research enterprises.",
keywords = "Frankenstein, Identity, Science communication, Science narratives, Science-fiction, Stigma",
author = "Peter Nagy and Ruth Wylie and Joey Eschrich and Edward Finn",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
day = "26",
doi = "10.1007/s11948-017-9936-9",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1--17",
journal = "Science and Engineering Ethics",
issn = "1353-3452",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why Frankenstein is a Stigma Among Scientists

AU - Nagy, Peter

AU - Wylie, Ruth

AU - Eschrich, Joey

AU - Finn, Edward

PY - 2017/6/26

Y1 - 2017/6/26

N2 - As one of the best known science narratives about the consequences of creating life, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus (1818) is an enduring tale that people know and understand with an almost instinctive familiarity. It has become a myth reflecting people’s ambivalent feelings about emerging science: they are curious about science, but they are also afraid of what science can do to them. In this essay, we argue that the Frankenstein myth has evolved into a stigma attached to scientists that focalizes the public’s as well as the scientific community’s negative reactions towards certain sciences and scientific practices. This stigma produces ambivalent reactions towards scientific artifacts and it leads to negative connotations because it implies that some sciences are dangerous and harmful. We argue that understanding the Frankenstein stigma can empower scientists by helping them revisit their own biases as well as responding effectively to people’s expectations for, and attitudes towards, scientists and scientific artifacts. Debunking the Frankenstein stigma could also allow scientists to reshape their professional identities so they can better show the public what ethical and moral values guide their research enterprises.

AB - As one of the best known science narratives about the consequences of creating life, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus (1818) is an enduring tale that people know and understand with an almost instinctive familiarity. It has become a myth reflecting people’s ambivalent feelings about emerging science: they are curious about science, but they are also afraid of what science can do to them. In this essay, we argue that the Frankenstein myth has evolved into a stigma attached to scientists that focalizes the public’s as well as the scientific community’s negative reactions towards certain sciences and scientific practices. This stigma produces ambivalent reactions towards scientific artifacts and it leads to negative connotations because it implies that some sciences are dangerous and harmful. We argue that understanding the Frankenstein stigma can empower scientists by helping them revisit their own biases as well as responding effectively to people’s expectations for, and attitudes towards, scientists and scientific artifacts. Debunking the Frankenstein stigma could also allow scientists to reshape their professional identities so they can better show the public what ethical and moral values guide their research enterprises.

KW - Frankenstein

KW - Identity

KW - Science communication

KW - Science narratives

KW - Science-fiction

KW - Stigma

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021307494&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85021307494&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11948-017-9936-9

DO - 10.1007/s11948-017-9936-9

M3 - Article

C2 - 28653167

AN - SCOPUS:85021307494

SP - 1

EP - 17

JO - Science and Engineering Ethics

JF - Science and Engineering Ethics

SN - 1353-3452

ER -