Resist, scientist! Countering degradation rituals in science
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2014.969022 |
| Pages | 203-220 |
| Published date | 01 June 2014 |
| Date | 01 June 2014 |
| Author | Sandrine Thérèse,Brian Martin |
RESEARCH PAPER
Resist, scientist! Countering degradation rituals in science
Sandrine Thérèse
a
and Brian Martin
b
*
a
School of Social Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia;
b
School of
Humanities and Social Inquiry, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia
When the work and reputation of scientists suffer ritual degradation, a range of
tactics can be deployed to resist and rework the psychological and social
impacts. Five key resistance tactics to degradation in science are revealing
degradation rituals, redeeming the reputation of the targeted scientist, reframing
the degradation as unfair, redirecting attention to other domains, and refusing to
cooperate with the rituals. These tactics are illustrated through three case studies
of scientists targeted for conducting research threatening to the interests of
powerful groups.
Introduction
The perceived trustworthiness and competence of scientists are key forms of cur-
rency in science that facilitate their careers and standing in the field. Attacks on the
reputation of scientists and the quality of their work therefore can have far reaching
impacts. These include professional impacts, such as the interruption or destruction
of scientific careers, status impacts from loss of qualifications and income, and per-
sonal impacts, such as alcoholism, depression, and loss or disruption of relationships
with colleagues, friends and family. The adverse impacts of attacks on scientists also
include the potential hindrance of scientific innovation, often via the chilling effect
on peers who witness the treatment of those targeted.
We focus here on one particular way of understanding methods for attacking dis-
sident scientists, namely as a degradation ritual in which the status and honour of an
individual are lowered. Such rituals have received relatively little attention, yet they
are crucially important when considering the obstacles potentially faced by innova-
tors in the face of a hostile establishment or orthodoxy. We focus on ways of chal-
lenging these rituals, something hardly ever analysed, in the hope of offering insight
to innovators in all fields.
Features of degradation rituals can be classified in terms of the types of agents
who enact the rituals, the contexts in which these rituals occur, the means by which
degradation rituals are performed, and the impacts or relative severity of the rituals
(Thérèse and Martin, 2010). Here we propose a complementary five-part schema to
classify and understand tactics of resistance deployed by targets of degradation ritu-
als in science in their attempt to deflect attacks and undo the negative impacts on
their personal identity and professional status.
Given that stakeholders in current knowledge and practices are often threatened by
innovators, and have the resources and authority to impose sanctions, it is to be
*Corresponding author. Email: bmartin@uow.edu.au
© 2014 Taylor & Francis
Prometheus, 2015
Vol. 32, No. 2, 203–220, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2014.969022
expected that innovators are likely to be targets for degradation rituals. Understanding
methods for resisting such rituals and their effects is therefore useful for those who
seek to challenge powerful groups or orthodox views and those who support a system
of science that is genuinely open to new ideas.
Our approach draws on a variety of literatures. One is writing on degradation ritu-
als, as discussed in the following section. Another is research on suppression of dis-
sent, especially in science (Moran, 1998; Martin, 1999), which can be located within
the wider context of free speech and free inquiry. A third relevant body of literature is
the study of strategy and tactics in social engagements (Jasper, 2006; Martin, 2007).
Studying tactics against degradation rituals can contribute insights into the study of
degradation rituals, dissent and social strategy. This is thus an interdisciplinary explo-
ration of an issue with relevance to several fields.
In the next section, we outline our approach to ritual in general and degradation
rituals in particular and summarise the implications of this approach for exploring
the role of ritual degradation in science (and potentially in other professional or
social contexts) and key forms of resistance to its effects. We then outline five key
types of tactics for resistance to degradation. Subsequently, we apply our model to
three cases of scientists whose work and reputation suffered different forms of ritual
degradation, illustrating the tactics of resistance adopted by the targets. In the con-
clusion, we reiterate the value of viewing attacks on scientists in terms of ritual deg-
radation and the need for further research on ‘resistance work’in science and other
professional contexts, namely where attempts are made to restore reputations that
have become, in the language of anthropologist Mary Douglas (1966), ‘polluted’.
A political approach to ritual degradation
The traditional functionalist approach to ritual presumes that it ensures social integra-
tion and social reproduction (Durkheim, 1995/1914). However, this approach pro-
vides no obvious handles for conceptualising resistance. For our purposes, we adopt
instead a perspective on ritual that enables a better understanding of social systems
that are contested or deserve to be. While rituals can be seen as expressions (Geertz,
1973) or performances (Turner, 1974, 1982) of core values in any socio-cultural sys-
tem or group, they can also be usefully understood as forms of strategic action
geared to produce specific social and power effects that may not always be achieved.
Useful for our purposes is the notion of ritualisation, which has been advanced
especially in the work of Catherine Bell (1992, 1997) as well as others (Lukes,
1975; Bloch, 1989; Bourdieu, 1991; Rappaport, 1999; Couldry, 2003). This concept
highlights distinctive and strategic practices that aim to mark off certain activities,
persons and things as privileged or ‘sacred’while others are demarcated as anathema
or ‘profane’. While this idea echoes the sacred/profane distinction made famous by
Durkheim, and commonly used to explain social order and reproduction as opposed
to social conflict and change, the strength of this approach to ritual is sensitivity to
contexts where these practices may not achieve their goals. Ritualisation serves both
to give particular individuals or groups privileged access to symbolic and material
resources (such as credibility, status, funding and jobs) and to limit or exclude access
by others. The study of degradation rituals brings into sharp relief the virtues of an
understanding of ritual as an exercise of power.
Some rituals, such as rites of passage (van Gennep, 1960), transform subjects
into valued social categories, for example, boys into warriors or separate individuals
204 S. Thérèse and B. Martin
To continue reading
Request your trial