1887

On the Problem and Promise of Metaphor Use in Science and Science Communication

    Authors: Cynthia Taylor1,*, Bryan M. Dewsbury1
    VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: Department of Biological Sciences, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI 02881
    AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION
    • Received 25 November 2017 Accepted 11 December 2017 Published 30 March 2018
    • ©2018 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology.

    • [open-access] This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ and https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode), which grants the public the nonexclusive right to copy, distribute, or display the published work.
    • *Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Biological Sciences, University of Rhode Island, Woodward Hall, Room 136, Kingston, RI 02881. Phone: 401-874-2123. Fax: 401-874-2202. E-mail: [email protected].
    Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. March 2018 vol. 19 no. 1 doi:10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1538
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • XML
    48.88 Kb
  • PDF
    188.38 Kb
  • HTML
    41.63 Kb

    Abstract:

    The language of science is largely metaphorical. Scientists rely on metaphor and analogy to make sense of scientific phenomena and communicate their findings to each other and to the public. Yet, despite their utility, metaphors can also constrain scientific reasoning, contribute to public misunderstandings, and, at times, inadvertently reinforce stereotypes and messages that undermine the goals of inclusive science. This paper 1) examines the generative potential of metaphors to the advancement of scientific knowledge and science communication, 2) highlights the ways in which outdated metaphors may limit scientific inquiry and contribute to public misunderstandings, and 3) critically analyzes the implications of cryptic social and political messages embedded in common metaphors in the life sciences.

References & Citations

1. Jäkel O, Döring M, Beger A 2016 Science and metaphor: a truly interdisciplinary perspective. The third international metaphorik.de workshop Metaphorik.de – online journal on metaphor and metonymy http://www.metaphorik.de/fr/journal/26/science-and-metaphor-truly-interdisciplinary-perspective-third-international-metaphorikde-workshop.html
2. Larson L, Brendon MH 2011 Metaphors for environmental sustainability: redefining our relationship with nature Yale University Press New Haven, CT
3. Kuhn TS Metaphor in science 409 419 Ortony A Metaphor and thought Cambridge University Press Cambridge, MA
4. Sheehan RDJ 1999 Metaphor as hermeneutic Rhetor Soc Q 29 2 47 64 10.1080/02773949909391143 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02773949909391143
5. Condit CM 1999 How the public understands genetics: non-deterministic and non-discriminatory interpretations of the “blueprint” metaphor Public Underst Sci 8 3 169 180 10.1088/0963-6625/8/3/302 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/8/3/302
6. Brown TL 2003 Making truth: metaphor in science University of Illinois Press Urbana, IL
7. Nerlich B, Elliot R, Larson B 2016 Communicating biological sciences: ethical and metaphorical dimensions Ashgate Publishing Company Farnham, UK
8. Franklin S 1995 Science as culture, cultures of science Ann Rev Anthropol 24 163 184 10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.001115 http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.001115
9. Martin E 1991 The egg and the sperm: how science has constructed a romance based on stereotypical male-female roles Signs 16 3 485 501 10.1086/494680 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/494680
10. Nelkin D, Lindee MS 2004 The DNA mystique: the gene as a cultural icon University of Michigan Press Ann Arbor, MI 10.3998/mpub.6769 http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/mpub.6769
11. Dijck JV 1998 Imagenation: popular images of genetics NYU Press New York, NY 10.1057/9780230372665 http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230372665
12. Garfield E 1986 The metaphor–science connection Curr Contents 42 3 10
13. Richards IA 1930 Practical criticism: a study of literary judgment Kegan Paul Trench Trubner and Co Ltd London
14. Lakoff G, Johnson M 1980 Metaphors we live by University of Chicago Press Chicago, IL
15. Thibodeau PH, Boroditsky L 2011 Metaphors we think with: the role of metaphor in reasoning PLOS One 6 2 e16782 10.1371/journal.pone.0016782 21373643 3044156 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016782
16. Lakoff G 2008 Women, fire, and dangerous things University of Chicago Press Chicago, IL
17. Niebert K, Gropengießer H 2015 Understanding starts in the mesocosm: conceptual metaphor as a framework for external representations in science teaching Int J Sci Educ 37 5–6 903 933 10.1080/09500693.2015.1025310 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1025310
18. Thibodeau PH, Boroditsky L 2013 Natural language metaphors covertly influence reasoning PLOS One 8 1 e52961 10.1371/journal.pone.0052961 23301009 3534638 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052961
19. Flusberg SJ, Matlock T, Thibodeau PH 2017 Metaphors for the war (or race) against climate change Environ Commun 11 6 769 783 10.1080/17524032.2017.1289111 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2017.1289111
20. Matlock T, Coe C, Westerling AL 2017 Monster wildfires and metaphor in risk communication Metaphor Symb 32 4 250 261 10.1080/10926488.2017.1384273 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2017.1384273
21. Vollmer G 1984 Mesocosm and objective knowledge 69 121 Wuketits FM Concepts and approaches in evolutionary epistemology Springer Netherlands 10.1007/978-94-009-7127-1_4 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7127-1_4
22. Del Vecchio D, Abdallah H, Qian Y, Collins JJ 2017 A blueprint for a synthetic genetic feedback controller to reprogram cell fate Cell Syst 4 1 109 120.e11 10.1016/j.cels.2016.12.001 28065574 5326680 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cels.2016.12.001
23. Hopiavuori BR, Agbaga MP, Brush RS, Sullivan MT, Sonntag WE, Anderson RE 2017 Regional changes in CNS and retinal glycerophospholipid profiles with age: a molecular blueprint J Lipid Res 58 4 668 680 10.1194/jlr.M070714 28202633 5392743 http://dx.doi.org/10.1194/jlr.M070714
24. Massilamany C, Mohammed A, Loy JD, Purvis T, Krishnan B, Basavalingappa RH, Kelley CM, Guda C, Barletta RG, Moriyama EM, Smith TPL, Reddy J 2016 Whole genomic sequence analysis of Bacillus infantis: defining the genetic blueprint of strain NRRL B-14911, an emerging cardiopathogenic microbe BMC Genomics 17 7 511 10.1186/s12864-016-2900-2 27557119 5001198 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12864-016-2900-2
25. Rothman BK 2001 The book of life: a personal and ethical guide to race, normality and the human gene study Beacon Press Boston, MA
26. Pigliucci M, Boudry M 2011 Why machine-information metaphors are bad for science and science education Sci Educ 20 453 471 10.1007/s11191-010-9267-6 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9267-6
27. Condit CM, Bates BR, Galloway R, Givens SB, Haynie CK, Jordan JW, Stables G, West HM 2002 Recipes or blueprints for our genes? How contexts selectively activate the multiple meanings of metaphors Q J Speech 88 3 303 325 10.1080/00335630209384379 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335630209384379
28. Condit CM, Condit DM 2001 Blueprints and recipes: gendered metaphors for genetic medicine J Med Humanit 22 1 29 39 10.1023/A:1026634010579 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1026634010579
29. Larson BM 2005 The war of the roses: demilitarizing invasion biology Front Ecol Environ 3 9 495 500 10.1890/1540-9295(2005)003[0495:TWOTRD]2.0.CO;2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/1540-9295(2005)003[0495:TWOTRD]2.0.CO;2
30. Flannery MC 2001 Quilting: a feminist metaphor for scientific inquiry Qual Inq 7 5 628 645 10.1177/107780040100700507 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/107780040100700507
31. Herbers JM 2007 Watch your language! Racially loaded metaphors in scientific research BioScience 57 2 104 105 10.1641/B570203 http://dx.doi.org/10.1641/B570203
32. Bharj N, Hegarty P 2015 A postcolonial feminist critique of harem analogies in psychological science J Soc Polit Psychol 3 1 257 275 10.5964/jspp.v3i1.133 http://dx.doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v3i1.133
33. Ceccarelli L 2013 On the frontier of science: an American rhetoric of exploration and exploitation 1st ed Michigan State University Press East Lansing, MI
34. Archer L, Dewitt J, Osborne J 2015 Is science for us? Black students’ and parents’ views of science and science careers Sci Educ 99 2 199 237 10.1002/sce.21146 28579645 5434900 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.21146
35. Gauthier GR, Hill PW, McQuillan J, Spiegel AN, Diamond J 2017 The potential scientist’s dilemma: how the masculinization of science shapes friendships and science job preferences Soc Sci Basel Switz 6 1 14
36. Cundiff JL, Vescio TK, Loken E, Lo L 2013 Do gender–science stereotypes predict science identification and science career aspirations among undergraduate science majors? Soc Psychol Educ 16 4 541 554 10.1007/s11218-013-9232-8 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11218-013-9232-8

Supplemental Material

No supplementary material available for this content.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1538
2018-03-30
2020-07-10

Abstract:

The language of science is largely metaphorical. Scientists rely on metaphor and analogy to make sense of scientific phenomena and communicate their findings to each other and to the public. Yet, despite their utility, metaphors can also constrain scientific reasoning, contribute to public misunderstandings, and, at times, inadvertently reinforce stereotypes and messages that undermine the goals of inclusive science. This paper 1) examines the generative potential of metaphors to the advancement of scientific knowledge and science communication, 2) highlights the ways in which outdated metaphors may limit scientific inquiry and contribute to public misunderstandings, and 3) critically analyzes the implications of cryptic social and political messages embedded in common metaphors in the life sciences.

Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmbe/19/1/jmbe-19-46.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1538&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Author and Article Information

  • Received 25 November 2017 Accepted 11 December 2017 Published 30 March 2018
  • ©2018 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology.

  • [open-access] This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ and https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode), which grants the public the nonexclusive right to copy, distribute, or display the published work.
  • *Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Biological Sciences, University of Rhode Island, Woodward Hall, Room 136, Kingston, RI 02881. Phone: 401-874-2123. Fax: 401-874-2202. E-mail: [email protected].

Back to top
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error