args

THBT: Scientific Writings should be written in Common Vernacular

Hello there! I will briefly reply to you. I'm glad we both broadly agree on this topic. 1. In saying that there are poor and excellent examples of (particularly scientific) writing, I would just like to ask whether you have identified what stylistically makes scientific writing excellent? What is good scientific writing? 2 and 3. Personally I am not sure that even the proposition "Specialists should make an effort to ensure that their writings are easily understood in Common Vernacular" ought be the case. If scientists are communicating with other scientists then they should use the language most appropriate to their ends (which is often technical language). It should be the role of writers of popular science to decide what information in academia is important enough that they should translate it for public consumption. There is a type of author is society whose role this is. Men like Steven Pinker, Dawkins and Neil DeGrasse Tyson as well as egotists like Jordan Peterson translate and cohere specialist knowledge for public consumption. Why exactly should scientists writing for other scientists in their field write for a public audience exactly? Many are not great writers even if they are fluent in the technical language/s they use to communicate with one another. Scientific writing is as such that some of it is very obscure. This obscurity is meant to communicate with others who are equally well-versed in its technicalities. The intended audience is very small. This does make interdisciplinary or interprofessional learning harder (which is not desirable). This technical writing contrasts with the idea in fiction of writing for a universal audience - in such a way that what is written will be understood by all. The solution I would thus pose to you then would be that it should be encouraged that those who are both proficient in technical languages and in engaging public writing should translate technical knowledge for more public audiences. These translators - instead of the specialists themselves - should be the ones responsible for bringing specialist knowledge to the public. 5. I think your idea here is that the more practically important communication is the greater the responsibility is to make it clear and unambigious. Can you provide any examples of this to elucidate it a bit further for me? & also Good luck with your exams!