Sign in

A reflection on my assumptions about science communication.

Photo by Obi Onyeador on Unsplash

I’ve always thought science communication was trying to find the best way to present the facts of science to the public. I assumed that if we could show the data in a better way, a more easily understood way, then we can reduce skepticism of science. I was excited about taking a whole course to learn how to do just that. …

Examining the failings of the classic definition of objectivity and what we can do instead.

Sol LeWitt’s “Objectivity” (1962) via AP/National Gallery of Art

The definition of objectivity is slightly different depending on its context. In philosophy, it is truth that is separate from an individual’s subjectivity, while in science, it refers to judging impartially. In all definitions, there is an emphasis on removing ourselves from the resulting product. But humans aren’t truly objective, because we always bring all of ourselves into every situation. This includes the best of us and the worst of us. All of the implicit and explicit biases that our society has ingrained in us…

Standpoint theory offered me a foundation to justify inclusion to others.

Illustration by Hailee Schievelbein

A statement like “inclusion is important, and offers new perspectives” is something that has always seemed rather intuitive to me. It seems so obvious to me that diversity is important, because why wouldn’t I want to hear ideas different to my own and learn from others? It’s also individually important to me, as a queer person and a woman (or close enough — I was assigned female at birth), to have my voice heard wherever decisions are being made. …


LB 321 senior at Michigan State University, majoring in Microbiology with a minor in Environment and Health

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store