David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
There is a rapidly growing public interest in nanotechnology such that people increasingly buy various books to inform themselves about nanotechnology. This paper tries to measure the public interest focus on nanotechnology and its relation to the public interest in other fields of knowledge by applying a new method. I combine formal network analysis of co-purchase book data with traditional content analysis. The method is successful in identifying the books that the public reads to be informed about nanotechnology, in distinguishing between different kinds and classes of books and thereby between different interest foci and readerships and their relations. The results suggest that nanotechnology is for many the first intense contact with science and technology and that they read a great variety of different kinds of books. Rather than on general introductions to current research written by scientists or science journalists, readers focus on forecasting and visionary literature including business guides, written by software entrepreneurs and business consultants. Unlike expert readers, who connect nanotechnology to other fields of science and engineering, the broader public connects it to visions about dissolving the human/machine distinction. Although the distinction between non-fiction and science fiction is still important for readers, border-crossing authors increasingly blur it.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Mette Ebbesen (2008). The Role of the Humanities and Social Sciences in Nanotechnology Research and Development. NanoEthics 2 (3):333-333.
Robert Sparrow (2009). The Social Impacts of Nanotechnology: An Ethical and Political Analysis. [REVIEW] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 6 (1):13-23.
Chris Toumey (2011). Seven Religious Reactions to Nanotechnology. NanoEthics 5 (3):251-267.
Katherine McComas (2012). Researcher Views About Funding Sources and Conflicts of Interest in Nanotechnology. Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (4):699-717.
Andrew Jamison (2009). Can Nanotechnology Be Just? On Nanotechnology and the Emerging Movement for Global Justice. NanoEthics 3 (2):129-136.
Renee Kyle & Susan Dodds (2009). Avoiding Empty Rhetoric: Engaging Publics in Debates About Nanotechnologies. Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):81-96.
Craig Cormick (2009). Why Do We Need to Know What the Public Thinks About Nanotechnology? NanoEthics 3 (2):167-173.
Kamilla Lein Kjølberg (2009). Representations of Nanotechnology in Norwegian Newspapers — Implications for Public Participation. NanoEthics 3 (1):61-72.
Armin Grunwald (2005). Nanotechnology — a New Field of Ethical Inquiry? Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (2):187-201.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads6 ( #218,107 of 1,140,333 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #140,127 of 1,140,333 )
How can I increase my downloads?