In this paper I will briefly discuss two questions concerning the relationship between science and the rest of society. The first question is about how science is presented, from the scientific community, to the general public. The second question concerns what is done within the scientific community to mark the territory of science, that is, to protect science from non- science.
Let me clarify some concepts before we start. By the term "science", I mean "natural science", that is, the areas physics, chemistry, biology, and areas associated with them that also use the methods of natural science (such as biochemistry). That means that areas such as psychology are also included. Another clarification is concerning the relationship between the scientific community and society. I do not think one should talk of the scientific community and society as if they were two separate spheres (which is sometimes done within the political debate about science). The scientific community is part of society, just as any other part, such as politicians, children, and industry. Therefore, I make a distinction between the scientific community and the general public, with the latter meaning those persons who are not involved in the scientific process itself (other than as subjects or those who live with the effects of science). This may be a problematic division, but it will be good enough for the brief discussion that will be made here.
The term "scientifically proven" is ubiquitous in culture. In my experience, science is almost always presented as rock-hard and 100 percent certain. There are no doubts or problems in these descriptions. For instance, in an introductory textbook on research methods in psychology by Shaughnessy and Zechmeister (1994), science is portrayed without inherent problems and as a convergence toward truth. This view was also expressed by one of Sweden's most known persons in science, the author and physician P C Jersild as he gave a talk when appointed to "Educator of the year" ("Årets folkbildare") (Gander, 1998a). The same picture was again present in the conference on science and society called Brytpunkt -98, for instance in the talk by Professor Arne Jernelöw (Gander, 1998b).
To my mind, it is a positivist view of science that is presented to the general public, even though this view has been abandoned within the scientific community itself (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). The problems of science are seldom mentioned in presentations to the general public, for instance, Hume's problem of induction (see Chalmers, 1982).
I believe people find this view of science unrealistic. So, when this is the view that is presented by the scientific community, it leads to that some people reject science altogether. This might be a cause for the growth of alternative world views (for instance, New age - see Gander, 1998b). Admitting that there are problems with science lead to a more realistic view of science, which in turn might lead to wider acceptance of science among the general public.
The conference Brytpunkt -98 (Gander, 1998b) included people from the scientific community and had as one of its aims to discuss how science should protect itself from non- science, which was devoted a special panel discussion. Surprisingly, the discussion revealed that the panel as well as the audience agreed that there was no need to protect science from non-science. "Let people believe what they want" was a common statement in the discussion. The exception was when non-science disguises as science or when people make money on other people's beliefs. These were seen as the only real cases where science had to be protected.
Gander, P. (1998a). Summary of the talk Darwins ofullbordade by P C Jersild, Stockholm March 24 1998. [On-line]. Available: URL: http://www.pierregander.com/phd/seminars/jersild980324.html
Gander, P. (1998b). Summary of conference Mellan vetenskap och vidskepelse - om gränser och gränsdragning, Brytpunkt -98, Forskningsrådsnämndens (FRN) årskonferens, March 25 1998. [On-line]. Available: URL: : http://www.pierregander.com/phd/seminars/brytpunkt98.html
Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Shaughnessy, J. J. & Zechmeister, E. B. (1994). Research methods in psychology (3rd ed.). Singapore: McGraw-Hill.