Craig Rosa writes
 
>Science is a belief system
>that is all the more sinister by its hegemonic smugness and transparency.
>Science gave us powerfully addictive drugs, atomic bombs, superviruses, mustard
>gas, and it is really the misuse of science, not faith, that threatens our
>planet.
 
I agree:
 
I am doing my dissertation on a roadside museum called Robot World in the
midwest. In the design and arrangement of its exhibits RW is also
critiqueing scientific knowledge as it is circulated through schools etc.
(glad to share my paper on it with anyone interested, always looking for
constructive feedback). In regards to Wayne Wakefield's comments, from
working with the staff of that particular locale, I can say that this
museum, at any rate, is very aware of other museums (though not necessarily
of the particular techniques involved in their mainstream museology) and
has a sense of where it is in a continuous pecking order of (1) museums and
(2) the entertainment industry.
 
Robot World like the creationist museums is counter hegemonic to "science"
as it has turned itself into the dominant doxa of our era. I'm particularly
interested in other examples of such "popular" appropriations of the
science museum. I'm also interested in finding a (theoretical) position
which allows me to critique what I see in terms of conservative impulses
within the museum's critique of scientific practice and still appreciate
its "political" importance. Any ideas on either of these?
 
--Matthew Weinstein
 
Question of the year: How is technoscientific culture linked to tourist
practices?