Jan 25, 2007
Scientific stereotypes
Scientific stereotypes continue to persist, stretching even as far as recent Google acquisition, Youtube, the social video upload site. (Right click and view image to read it full size).
Today, Youtube had a period of allegedly scheduled downtime and to explain the lack of vids, they displayed a cartoon showing a marginally mad scientist (albeit a youngster rather than the usual aged, balding mad scientist). The scientist in question seemed malevolently preoccupied with pouring one green liquid from a test-tube into another. For what purpose we’re not told, but the caption beneath read:
“We’re busy pushing out some new concoctions and formulas We’ll be back soon…assuming all reactions are stable”
Inherent in that phrase is a fundamental lack of understanding of chemistry, of course. What, after all is a “stable reaction”, a reaction by virtue of being is anything but stable, it is intrinsically unstable, in constant flux…reacting! Perhaps they meant to say “steady reaction”, instead, a reaction can be steady, with a constant conversion of starting materials into stable products and byproducts as opposed to an explosive reaction, which one might talk about as being unsteady, or perhaps that’s what they are alluding to in using the words stable, somehow attempting to imply that reactions to their new concoctions might be unstable and lead to an extension of their scheduled downtime.
I suspect most Youtube readers will not care one ion. But, the pushing of scientific stereotypes in popular culture is a serious issue. With scientists repeatedly characterised as mad, malevolent or at best absent minded, it is difficult to see how the general public will ever reach a point at which they will understand or trust the scientific endeavour.
You can read a feature article I wrote on the subject of scientific stereotypes for the now defunct HMSBeagle webzine on BioMedNet here. Note the hopefully ironic use of a benevolent, slightly madcap, and certainly balding character as illustration.
Indeed, once a scientist, always a scientist, and a good thing too!
Love your article on Scientific Stereotypes.
I remember commenting to one of my daughters’ science teachers “I used to be a scientist”, to which the response was “Once a scientist, always a scientist”, which to be honest I found comforting.
But I struggle now with cognitive disfunction from ME/CFS (far worse than the “fatigue” that some doctors seem to believe is the problem). I still try and read papers, link correctly, source my references, but it’s an uphill struggle and I’m afraid I’m not doing as well as I’d like.
I’m happy to say that both my girls went in for science in school. One is now working in Environmental Science, and I don’t think she conforms to the stereotype! ;-) Guess she has too much fun for one thing!
Best wishes from Liverpool!
What is more problematic is the lack of safety glasses, gloves, a buttoned lab coat, proper decanting technique and appropriate ventilation and shielding for a reaction that is potentially unstable (whatever that means).
Mitch