Writings of Science and Technology

There isn’t one single purpose for writing about science and technology or one specific audience that is trying to be reached. Two types of people tend to write about science and technology, and they can be categorized as either scientists or historians. Scientists tend to write for other scientists or professionals in their field. As a result, they make several assumptions, including numerous about the reader’s prior knowledge of the topic. This is because professionals do not need specific terms or concepts explained in detail, and they are held to a higher standard than the general public. In addition, the purpose for a scientist’s writing is usually to prove a concept or defend one side of an argument. By publishing their findings, they are looking for scientific breakthroughs or the opportunity to confirm their hypothesis. They rarely write simply to inform others on what they found without drawing any further conclusions. Furthermore, scientists tend to focus solely on the facts. Scientific journals are not concerned with prose and word choice or extracting specific emotional responses from their audience. Someone who is not very familiar with the scientific world would not only say that the written work of a scientist can be difficult to comprehend, but it is also rather boring. I feel that the writing of a scientist is more useful and credible than that of a historian as well. Since scientists are reporting and analyzing their findings, their work is more productive and beneficial to the world of science. Moreover, since they are experts in their respective fields, their work can be read with less skepticism and questionable information compared to the work of historians.

Both the audience and purpose that historians focus on when writing about science and technology greatly differ from those of scientists. Primarily, historians broaden their audience to include people who may know very little about the topic. This not only breaks down technological and scientific innovation for those who have not studied these topics much, but it sparks the interest of a greater audience. The writing of a scientist is too advanced to benefit anyone who is not already an aficionado for science, and these people may lose their interest in science if it wasn’t for historians. Furthermore, historians tend to write more of a narrative when writing about science and technology. They are able to turn facts and famous events in the world of science and technology into stories driven by plot and even some suspense. For example, Miller mentions that scientists are portrayed as heroes once they make a discovery, and their breakthroughs can be described as mythical or extraordinary based on how the historian portrays them. Even though historians lack the credibility of professionals when writing about science, their contributions are still crucial to expand scientific and technological works to a broader audience. Just as scientists write to contribute to the world of science, historians make their contributions with the general public and in facets of society outside the scientific world. Likewise, the fact that their purpose is to inform the reader through narrative, which can be viewed as entertainment, proves that they are essential in maintaining a wider spectrum of interest toward science and technology.