Science as a human and social practice
Science is a human, social practice shaped by cultural, material, and theoretical contexts. Sabina Leonelli highlights its complexity, challenging the myth of neutrality in scientific inquiry
At the ENJOI Observatory for Outstanding Open Science Communication, thoroughly understanding how scientific knowledge is produced is seen as essential for journalists and science communicators alike. Indeed, such understanding is crucial for ensuring clarity and transparency when reporting on new discoveries or summarising research findings. Without fully comprehending the social and human contexts in which science is created, there is a risk of raising unrealistic expectations about science’s ability to deliver absolute “certainties” or presenting its methods and results in a biased or inaccurate way.
Science is part of society
A valuable source for avoiding these biases is provided by the expert literature produced by some philosophers and sociologists of science, who often work closely with researchers in the “hard” and life sciences to gain a deeper understanding of the many dimensions that influence the production of scientific knowledge.
One scholar who has extensively explored this theme is philosopher Sabina Leonelli. In her work, Leonelli emphasises that science is not a purely objective and rational process of inquiry aimed at uncovering truths about reality. On the contrary, it is a complex, often non-linear endeavour, shaped by the social context in which it takes place and by the human actors involved – individuals who are citizens and members of a community before they take on the role of scientists.
It is essential to consider how science is deeply entangled with its broader social and cultural context, primarily when, as a science communicator, one engages with research across different disciplines and places, as this “bigger picture” is key to fully grasping how science works. Awareness of this interconnectedness also helps recognise that scientific production is not a standardised, monolithic practice; rather, it varies worldwide, reflecting diverse ways of knowing and researching and encompassing a range of equally valid methodologies and approaches. Embracing this pluralism can enrich the research itself as well as strengthen the public debate around scientific knowledge.
Beyond neutrality: factors influencing the scientific process
Moreover, Leonelli emphasises in her research – which she conducts in close collaboration with experimental scientists, often following their work in the lab and engaging in discussions about the challenges, values, and expectations of scientific practice – that because science is a fundamentally human activity, it is inevitably permeated by sociological and anthropological factors that influence every stage of the scientific process, from the design of research questions to the interpretation of data, and ultimately, the results themselves.
This perspective is particularly valuable for science communicators, as it encourages a move away from the notion of science as inherently “neutral.” Because science is shaped by social contexts and carried out by humans, it simply cannot be entirely neutral. Instead, it is always “theory-laden,” even when it is grounded in data and appears to be far removed from theoretical assumptions. Another essential dimension to consider when observing scientific practice is the material context in which it unfolds. Funding availability, access to infrastructure, and even the surrounding political climate (as the current situation in the US dramatically demonstrates) all significantly affect research outcomes.
By drawing attention to these often-overlooked factors that subtly concur to shape the scientific endeavour, science communicators can help challenge the common perception of science as an entirely objective body of knowledge meant to deliver definitive certainties about the world. Instead, they can promote a more accurate and nuanced understanding of this human activity – one that recognises the complex interplay of human, social, and contextual factors that shape scientific work.
To learn more about Leonelli’s work:
