Online citations, reference lists, and bibliographies.
← Back to Search

Bounding An Emerging Technology: Para-scientific Media And The Drexler-Smalley Debate About Nanotechnology

S. Kaplan, Joanna Radin
Published 2011 · Sociology

Cite This
Download PDF
Analyze on Scholarcy
‘Nanotechnology’ is often touted as a significant emerging technological field. However, determining what nanotechnology means, whose research counts as nanotechnology, and who gets to speak on behalf of nanotechnology is a highly political process involving constant negotiation with significant implications for funding, legislation, and citizen support. In this paper, we deconstruct a high-profile moment of controversy about nanotechnology’s possibilities: a debate between K. Eric Drexler and Richard Smalley published as a ‘point—counterpoint’ feature in 2003 in Chemical & Engineering News. Rather than treat the debate as a stand-alone episode of scientific controversy, we seek to understand the forces that enabled it to be seen as such an episode. We introduce the term ‘para-scientific’ media to make explicit how certain forms of publication intervene in the dissemination of technical knowledge as it travels beyond its supposed site of production. The existence of para-scientific media is predicated on intimate association with formalized channels of scientific publication, but they also seek to engage other cultures of expertise. Through this lens, we show that Drexler and Smalley were not only independent entrepreneurs enrolling Chemical & Engineering News as a site of boundary work; members of the para-scientific media actively enrolled Drexler and Smalley as part of a broader effort to simplify a complex set of uncertainties about nanotechnology’s potential into two polarized views. In this case study, we examine received accounts of the debate, describe the boundary work undertaken by Drexler and Smalley to shape the path of nanotechnology’s emergence, and unpack the boundary work of the para-scientific media to create polarizing controversy that attracted audiences and influenced policy and scientific research agendas. Members of the para-scientific media have been influential in bounding nanotechnology as a field-in-tension by structuring irreconcilable dichotomies out of an ambiguous set of uncertainties. We conclude with thoughts about the implications of this case study for studies of science communication, institutional entrepreneurship and the ethics of emerging technologies.
This paper references
Prey. New York: HarperCollins
M Press. Crichton (2002)
Nanotech pioneer, Nobel laureate Richard Smalley dead at 62. Rice University press release
Drawing the Boundaries of Nanoscience — Rationalizing the Concerns?
M. Kaiser (2006)
he situated the blog as emerging at a moment when nano sits between 'vision and pragmatism -Drexler and Smalley
Entrepreneurship and the Construction of Value in Biotechnology
S. Kaplan (2008)
Letter to the editor
S. Nadarajah (2007)
Chemical & Engineering News, conducted
Institutional Entrepreneurship as Embedded Agency: An Introduction to the Special Issue
R. Garud (2007)
'Silence, Miss Carson!' Science, Gender, and the Reception of Silent Spring
M. Smith (2001)
The Dominant View of Popularization: Conceptual Problems, Political Uses
S. Hilgartner (1990)
Drexler and Smalley: Views from the gallery
M. Wendman (2004)
Social Skill and the Theory of Fields*
N. Fligstein (2001)
Drexler Counters
K E Drexler (2003)
Denialism: Drexler vs
D Berube (2004)
Cultures of expertise and the management of globalization: Toward the re-functioning of anthropology
D Holmes (2005)
Engines of Creation
K. E. Drexler (1986)
Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line
T. Gieryn (1999)
Collaboration Today and the Re-Imagination of the Classic Scene of Fieldwork Encounter
D. Holmes (2008)
for a careful discussion of the scientific merits of Smalley's 'fat fingers' argument and Drexler's rebuttal in the C&EN debate
See Bueno (2004)
Governing with the News: The News Media as a Political Institution
T. Cook (1998)
Of deficits, deviations, and dialogues: Theories of public communication in science and technology
M Bucchi (2008)
Mody CM (2009) Introduction, Special issue on history of nanotechnology
C Milburn (2008)
Denialism: Drexler vs. Roco
D. Berube (2004)
R. Mullin (2003)
Made available to the authors by consent of Drexler and Lounsbury
K Eric Oral History Of
Nanoconvergence: The Unity of Nanoscience, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science
W. Bainbridge (2007)
Why did universities start patenting? Institution-building and the road to the Bayh-Dole Act.
E. Berman (2008)
The Rise and Fall of Social Problems: A Public Arenas Model
S. Hilgartner (1988)
Introduction—Nanotechnology and the Public
Bruce V. Lewenstein (2005)
The Nanoscience and Nanotechnology Advisory Board Act' introduced by Rep
Box 3, Folder 3. Note Smalley's distinction between work done in the scientific press and what he calls the
Knowledge Producers and Knowledge Acquirers
R. Whitley (1985)
Silence Ms. Carson!
R Smalley (2003)
Nanosystems - molecular machinery, manufacturing, and computation
K. E. Drexler (1992)
Setting the Media’s Agenda: A Power Balance Perspective
Stephen D. Reese (1991)
Cold Fusion and Hot History
Bruce V. Lewenstein (1992)
Of chemistry, love and nanobots.
R. E. Smalley (2001)
R-NY) were also on the list, as well as a range of other notable players
Sherwood Boehlert
2003d) Open Letter
KE Drexler (2003)
Actual funding for the NNI since its inception has been (in millions of US dollars
How Superstition Won and Science Lost: Popularizing Science and Health in the United States
Michael D. Oppenheim (1988)
Genesis Redux: Essays in the History and Philosophy of Artificial Life
Daniel J. Nicholson (2011)
Scientists and Journalists: Reporting Science as News
S Friedman (1986)
On physics, fundamentals, and nanorobots: A rebuttal to Smalley's assertion that self-replicating mechanical nanorobots are simply not possible. Institute of Molecular Manufacturing
K E Drexler
The Public and Nanotechnology: How Citizens Make Sense of Emerging Technologies
D. Scheufele (2005)
Will small be beautiful? Making policies for our nanotech future
W. Mccray (2005)
2003e) Drexler Counters
KE Drexler (2003)
Global assemblages : technology, politics, and ethics as anthropological problems
A. Ong (2005)
On the basic concept of 'nano-technology
N Taniguchi (1974)
Bucky balls, fullerenes, and the future: An oral history interivew with Professor Richard R
Davis-Floyd R Cox
Introduction: Historicizing ‘popular science
JR Engineering. Topham (2009)
Representing Uncertainty in Global Climate Change Science and Policy: Boundary-Ordering Devices and Authority
S. Shackley (1996)
Interview by the authors with Rudy Baum
Nanotechnology: Drexler and Smalley make the case for and against 'molecular assemblers
R Baum
Waiting for Breakthroughs
G. Stix (1996)
Marking Time: On the Anthropology of the Contemporary
P. Rabinow (2007)
Science in Public: Communication, Culture and Credibility
J. Palen (1999)
Little Big Science.
G. Stix (1999)
Small Wonders, Endless Frontiers: A Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative
Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology
D. H. Mark (1995)
Para-sites : a casebook against cynical reason
G. E. Marcus (2000)
Mediating the Message: Theories of Influences on Mass Media Content
P. Shoemaker (1995)
examines the dichotomy between 'science' and 'superstition' in terms of popular science
John Burnham (1987)
Attention Cycles and Frames in the Plant Biotechnology Debate
Matthew C. Nisbet (2006)
Available at (accessed 15
Science in action : How to follow scientists and engineers through society
W. Bijker (1988)
The Long History of Molecular Electronics
Hyungsub Choi (2009)
R. Garud (2002)
On physics, fundamentals, and nanorobots: A rebuttal to Smalley’s assertion that self-replicating mechanical nanorobots are simply not possible
KE Drexler (2001)
Nanotechnology and the public
B V Lewenstein (2005)
Knowledge producers and knowledge acquirers: Popularisation as a relation between scientific fields and their publics
R Whitley (1985)
Undated email correspondence from Mihail Roco to Smalley, Richard E. Smalley Papers, Chemical Heritage Foundation
Scientists in government: Framing the environmental and societal implications of nanotechnology
J Radin (2004)
Modeling Molecules: Computational Nanotechnology as a Knowledge Community
Ann E Johnson (2009)
Available at
K E Drexler
Nanofallacies: Of chemistry, love and nanobots
Content. White Plains (2001)
Open letter to Richard Smalley
KE Drexler (2003)
Nanotechnology in the media: A preliminary analysis
B V Lewenstein (2007)
CITRUS CHEMISTRY BOOSTS DRUGS: Small company bets on grapefruit compounds that enhance the oral bioavailability of drugs
A. Rouhi (2003)
Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional
T. Gieryn (1983)
In Sputnik's Shadow: The President's Science Advisory Committee and Cold War America
Zuoyue Wang (2008)
Thinking About Technology: Applying a Cognitive Lens to Technical Change
S. Kaplan (2008)
Mediating Uncertainty
M. F. Ebeling (2008)
Cultural Entrepreneurship: Stories, Legitimacy and the Acquisition of Resources
Michael Lounsbury (2001)
Drexler KE (2001) Machine-phase nanotechnology
York Wiley (2001)
Toward closure: An open letter from K. Eric Drexler to Prof. Richard Smalley -Part II
K E Drexler
Taking the pulse of chemical science
R. Rawls (2003)
Cultures of Expertise and the Management of Globalization: Toward the Re‐Functioning of Ethnography
D. Holmes (2008)
Institutional Entrepreneurship in Emerging Fields: HIV/AIDS Treatment Advocacy in Canada
S. Maguire (2004)
An open letter to Richard Smalley
KE 74–75. Drexler (2003)
Institutional entrepreneurship in emerging fields
D MacKenzie (1996)
The drexler-smalley debate on nanotechnology: Incommensurability at work?
O. Bueno (2004)
Why The Future Doesn't Need Us
Joy Bill (2003)
The Incredible Shrinking Man
Richard Matheson (1995)
Knowing Machines
R. Bud (1998)
의제형성(agenda-building)의 정치학
하상복 (2011)
Scientists in government: Framing the environmental and societal implications
J Press. Radin (2004)
Who sets the media agenda? The ability of policymakers to determine news decisions
D Berkowitz (1992)
Expectations and the Emergence of Nanotechnology
Cynthia Selin (2007)
Two Cultures of Nanotechnology
Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent (2004)
Nanovision: Engineering the Future
C. Milburn (2008)
Productive Nanosystems: A Technnology Roadmap. Battelle Memorial Institute and Foresight Nanotechnology Institute. Available at roadmaps/Nanotech_Roadmap_2007_main.pdf
Foresight Battelle
A tale of two nanotechnologies (a personal account with a peculiar history)
KE Drexler (2005)
Responsibility and nanotechnology
E. McCarthy (2010)
Machine-phase nanotechnology.
K. Drexler (2001)
Big whig history and nano narratives: Effective innovation policy needs the historical dimension
C M Mody
More recently, government-affiliated nanotechnology supporters have presented the 'convergence' of nano, bio, and artificial intelligence as the bright future of federally funded big science
Made available to the authors by consent of Drexler and Lounsbury
Email correspondence from K. Eric Drexler to the authors
The meaning of `public understanding of science' in the United States after World War II
Bruce V. Lewenstein (1992)

This paper is referenced by
Science Means Never Having to Say You’re Sorry? Apologies for Scientific Misconduct
Felicitas Hesselmann (2019)
Organizational innovation efforts in multiple emerging market categories: Exploring the interplay of opportunity, ambiguity, and socio-cognitive contexts
J. Lo (2020)
From Field Consensus to Fragmentation : How Means-ends Decoupling Hinders Progress on Grand Challenges
S. Grodal (2015)
Opportunity, Status, and Similarity: Exploring the Varied Antecedents and Outcomes of Category Spanning Innovation
Tyler Wry (2017)
From Bench to Brand and Back: The Co-Shaping of Materials and Chemists in the Twentieth Century
P. Teissier (2017)
Chapter 1. Connecting traditional and new genres: Trends and emerging themes
María-José Luzón (2019)
Patterns in the Emergence of Nanotechnology: The Case of Fullerenes
S. Kaplan (2011)
Intimate cartographies : body maps and the epistemic encounter in China and Britain, 1893-1985
Lan Angela Li (2016)
Public understanding of nanotechnology in Spain
J. Ferri (2012)
Chapter 3. The case of the scientific research article and lessons concerning genre change online
Ashley Rose Mehlenbacher (2019)
Images and Imaginations: An Exploration of Nanotechnology Image Galleries
Kathryn de Ridder-Vignone (2012)
Crowdfunding Science: Exigencies and Strategies in an Emerging Genre of Science Communication
Ashley Rose Mehlenbacher (2017)
The Diverse Ecology of Electronic Materials
Cyrus C. M. Mody (2017)
Cyrus Mody: Instrumental Community: Probe Microscopy and the Path to Nanotechnology
Sarah Kaplan (2012)
“The Ennobling Unity of Science and Technology”: Materials Sciences and Engineering, the Department of Energy, and the Nanotechnology Enigma
Matthew N. Eisler (2013)
Exploring imaginative geographies of nanotechnologies in news media images of Italian nanoscientists
S. Arnaldi (2014)
Do Innovation Measures Actually Measure Innovation? Obliteration, Symbolic Adoption, and Other Finicky Challenges in Tracking Innovation Diffusion
Andrew J. Nelson (2014)
Promising, contesting and abandoning nanotechnology: dynamics of unrealised promises, expectations, and engagement with nanotechnology in the Australian context
S. McGrail (2011)
The role of future-oriented technology analysis in the governance of emerging technologies: The example of nanotechnology
P. Schaper-Rinkel (2013)
Ethics in Nano Education, but First the Ethics of Nano Education
Cyrus C. M. Mody (2018)
Assessing the future: past and present visions of nanomedicine.
Nils Kubischok (2015)
With Whom Do Technology Sponsors Partner During Technology Battles? Social Networking Strategies for Unproven (and Proven) Technologies
Susan K. Cohen (2016)
The Expansion of Science Policy in the United States in Three Cases: rDNA Research, The Human Genome Project, and the National Nanotechnology Initiative
M. Sullivan (2018)
Field Expansion and Contraction: How Communities Shape Social and Symbolic Boundaries
S. Grodal (2018)
Semantic Scholar Logo Some data provided by SemanticScholar