Skip to main content

Blog Article

Of Stereotypes and Scientists: STEM in Popular Media

Exploring the ways in which scientists are depicted, often in less-than-flattering ways, in movies. But is this just a reflection of the public’s conflicting attitudes toward scientists?

Published May 1, 2000

By Allison L.C. de Cerreño
Academy Contributor

Genetically modified food is a hot topic today. Advocates point to its tremendous potential, while detractors highlight concerns about possible environmental and health effects. At times, debates degenerate to name-calling, with some critics referring to the crops and their resulting products as “Frankenfoods.”

Mulling this over recently after reading still another article about “Frankenfoods,” I thought about how such a term paints a stereotypical picture of the “mad scientist” in his or her laboratory, reaching beyond what is reasonable without any regard for the potential impact on humanity. This, unfortunately, is not an uncommon portrayal. There are numerous examples of negative portrayals of scientists in popular culture.

Take, for example, motion pictures. With only few exceptions (most notably, Indiana Jones), scientists are characterized at best as bumbling geeks as in Flubber or Back to the Future. Lovable characters, to be sure, but eccentric to say the least. At other times, they are depicted as playing god – as in Jurassic Park. And last but not least is the portrayal of scientists as downright conniving and evil, as in The Island of Dr. Moreau or various James Bond movies.

The Public’s Conflicting Attitudes Toward Scientists

I am not the first to ponder these stereotypes. In an article in the November/December 1998 issue of The Sciences, M.Z. Ribalow explains that the filmmakers’ depictions are based on the public’s conflicting attitudes toward scientists. “We want what they have, but fear what they will do with it,” he observes. “Often, we admire their intellectual curiosity, but doubt whether they understand the full implications of their knowledge. We need them, but mistrust both them and our need.”

The way scientists as a group communicate—or fail to communicate—with the public is partly responsible for this mistrust and fear, and that can be changed over time. However, there is an underlying issue, exemplified by the debates over genetically modified foods, that must be addressed as communication is improved.

Scientists push the frontiers of current knowledge by challenging existing theory. Sometimes entire belief systems may be uprooted as a result of scientific findings. In other words, scientists challenge us to question who we are and the way we understand the world–– something not every society welcomes. Such reluctance to face the implications of scientific findings cannot be minimized or ignored. Better communication alone will not resolve the conflicting public attitudes toward scientists unless that communication is based on mutual understanding—the public better understanding scientists, and scientists better understanding society.

‘The Sciences’ archive is accessible to Academy members. Not a member of our impactful network? Sign up today.


Author

Image
Contributing Author