Scientific training often begins with learning content knowledge and techniques. As a student progresses, they are required to communicate the results of their experiments with their instructors in a manner that other scientists would understand. This style of communication is stressed throughout their entire training. But what happens when the need arises to communicate with interested nonscientific audiences? Scientific discourse has typically been considered what philosopher of language Mikhail Bakhtin termed an “authoritative discourse,”—a discourse that “binds us, quite independent of any power it might have to persuade us internally,” whose hegemony is traditionally a priori, unquestioned. However, within the public realm, that authority is in crisis. There is an unsettling rise of anti-scientific counter-discourses such as the anti-vaccine movement, the growing Flat Earth movement, climate change denialism, and a host of other “movements” grounded in either pseudo-science or an outright dismissal of scientific authority. In response to this crisis, scientists and educators have called for more attention to improving scientific literacy among the general public. By examining the generic conventions of scientific discourse using the theories of Mikhail Bakhtin, we hope to point out some of the barriers causing the current crisis in scientific authority.

科学培训通常从学习内容知识和技术开始。随着学生的进步，他们需要以其他科学家能够理解的方式与导师交流他们的实验结果。这种沟通方式在他们的整个培训过程中都得到了强调。但是，当需要与感兴趣的非科学受众交流时会发生什么？科学话语通常被认为是语言哲学家米哈伊尔·巴赫金（Mikhail Bakhtin）所说的“权威话语”——一种“将我们束缚起来，完全独立于它可能在内部说服我们的任何力量”的话语，其霸权传统上是先验的，不容置疑的。然而，在公共领域，这种权威正处于危机之中。反科学的反话语令人不安地兴起，例如反疫苗运动、日益增长的平地运动、气候变化否认主义，以及许多其他基于伪科学或彻底摒弃科学的“运动”权威。为应对这场危机，科学家和教育工作者呼吁更多地关注提高公众的科学素养。通过使用米哈伊尔·巴赫金的理论研究科学话语的一般惯例，我们希望指出导致当前科学权威危机的一些障碍。科学家和教育工作者呼吁更多地关注提高公众的科学素养。通过使用米哈伊尔·巴赫金的理论研究科学话语的一般惯例，我们希望指出导致当前科学权威危机的一些障碍。科学家和教育工作者呼吁更多地关注提高公众的科学素养。通过使用米哈伊尔·巴赫金的理论研究科学话语的一般惯例，我们希望指出导致当前科学权威危机的一些障碍。