OK, I know I said I wouldn’t write anything more about “framing science.” I mean, when Chris Mooney and Matt Nisbet used Lakoff’s concept of “frames” to say that Richard Dawkins was doing wrong, and when Sean Carroll used the public-policy notion of the “Overton Window” to argue that Richard Dawkins was doing right. . . “Windows”? “Frames”? I think it’s time for a beer. Or more.
Despite all that, I think I need to say just one more thing. I’ve discovered why scientists are apt to hate the terminology of “framing,” no matter what they think of the challenges involved in communicating science. And, believe it or not, I made this discovery thanks to Doonesbury.
Windows? I prefer Mac or Linux, thanks. And HTML frames have been on the out since at least the mid 90s.
Yeah. Nowadays it’s all about “tabling science” and “cascading style sheets of science.”
(re-reads previous two comments)
Oh, damn.
I believe in fairies! I believe in fairies!
Heh–evidently none of Trudeau’s editors noticed that he misspelled “phenomenal.”
Hee hee! That’s a good one. I wonder if the line break makes it harder to notice such a goof?
It did for me. I usually spot mispelings instantly :)