Are debatable scienti c questions debatable ?

Scientists often Ž nd diμ culty in engaging in formal public debate about transcientiŽ c social issues. Although science is a highly disputatious institution, public argumentation amongst scientists follows very di¶ erent conventional practices from those that rule in political and legal arenas. Amongst other di¶ erentiating features, scientiŽ c disputes are typically conducted in writing rather than orally, they are not sharply polarised or formally adversarial, they are seldom addressed to a speciŽ c proposition, and they do not reach decisive closure. As a result, the rhetorical style that scientists learn from participation in such practises is not well adapted to the established format of socio-political ‘debate ’. For scientists to contribute e¶ ectively to such debates, they must learn new ways of making their particular type of knowledge convincing in unfamiliar intellectual and social contexts.