Section I
Chapter 1:
Scientific and Technical Communication in Context
Part 1;
Part 2;
Part 3
Chapter 2:
Reading Scientific and Technical Texts
Chapter 3:
Writing Scientific and Technical Texts
Part 1;
Part 2;
Part 3
Chapter 4:
Conducting Research
Part 1;
Part 2
Chapter 5:
Understanding Audiences
Part 1;
Part 2
Chapter 6:
Persuasion and Critical Thinking
Part 1;
Part 2
Chapter 7:
Participation and Policy
Part 1;
Part 2
Section II
Chapter 8:
Definitions, Descriptions, and Instructions
Part 1;
Part 2
Chapter 9:
Correspondence
Chapter 10:
Job-Finding Materials
Chapter 11:
Proposals
Part 1;
Part 2
Chapter 12:
Technical Reports
Chapter 13:
Scientific Articles and Abstracts
Chapter 14:
Oral Presentations
Chapter 15:
Formatting, Designing, and Using Graphics
Part 1;
Part 2
Grammar Handbook
Section III
Chapter 16:
Opening
Geoff Cooper:
"Textual Technologies"
Discussion
Chapter 17:
Opening
Steve Fuller: "Putting People Back Into the Business of Science"
Part 1; Part 2
Discussion
Chapter 18:
Opening
William Keith: "Science and Communication"
Discussion
Chapter 19:
→ Opening
Sujatha Raman: "Challenging High-Tech War"
Discussion
Chapter 20:
Opening
Dale L. Sullivan: "Migrating Across Disciplinary Boundaries"
Discussion
Chapter 21:
Opening
Tobias, Chubin, Aylesworth: "Restructuring Demand for Scientific Expertise"
Part 1; Part 2
Discussion
Opening
In a broad sense, most scientific and technical controversies are linguistic. In 1633 the Vatican arrested Galileo Galilei for writing — against the orders of the Church — that the earth revolves around the sun. In other words, Galileo's description of the local universe differed from the Church's. In October of 1992 Pope John Paul II made a papal statement vindicating the astronomer. What is interesting here is that the Pope was not so much conceding the obvious ö that Galileo was right ö but rather that the Pope wanted to restore Galileo's standing as a Christian. Specifically, the Pope asserted that because Galileo argued against an absolute reading of the Bible, he was a more sophisticated and, essentially, a better theologian than his persecutors. In other words, the Pope considered that Galileo's description of the Bible's description of nature was superior to that of the fifteenth century church.
This most famous of scientific controversies shares much with others ö an issue which affects people personally and may threaten (or seem to threaten) health, life, or fundamental beliefs. Science and religion have spurred other controversies: creationism vs. Darwinism, right-to-life issues, and scientific examination of sacred burial sites, for instance. More mundane but no less inflammatory controversies surround us: fluoridation, high-voltage electric power lines, secondary tobacco smoke, nuclear power — the list seems to grow longer daily. Both sides of each issue use argument and persuasion to bolster their cases; and at times the language — perhaps most evident in protesters' chants and bumper stickers — obfuscates more than clarifies. We might expect that scientists, and people representing or claiming to represent scientists, do better. Often though, their language — while seemingly more sophisticated than the laypersons' — is at least as confusing.
The 1991 Persian Gulf War is, perhaps, one of the most interesting cases of control of the media and, subsequently, public opinion in the modern era. Perhaps unalterably, the story of war has been changed. The story is no longer about the repugnance of military action, the devastation of culture, the bombing of ancient cities, and the death of men, women and children, but of the success of technology. Through a global, cable news outlet the military presented the images it wanted the world to see, using the language it wanted the world to hear. The power of persuasion, and our need as a society to look beyond it, were never more clearly evident. In the following article Sujatha Raman argues that the military, the press and the politicians used a kind of description (specifically, terms evocative of cleanliness and precision) which conveyed a picture of the U.S. victory at variance with reality. Chapter 6 in Part I of the text examines the mechanics of persuasion and argument with respect to various functions of language. Taking the Gulf War as a case study, Raman offers additional strategies for analyzing the rhetorical nature of scientific and technical discourse for understanding, and making decisions about, our support of given technologies and their consequences.