Defining the scientific community: A rhetorical perspective on demarcation

Long traditions of philosophical and sociological research have addressed questions of the demarcation of science, i.e., how to identify the “unique and essential” characteristics of science which are taken as ostensibly distinguishing it from other forms of human conduct. In contrast, this essay argues that demarcation is most usefully viewed as a practical matter, rhetorically negotiated by scientists (and other social actors) in particular interest‐driven rhetorical contexts. A case study of the 1989 cold fusion controversy illustrates an implicit demarcation rhetoric which grew out of the professional physics community's interest‐driven need to provide a plausible explanation for the errors committed by the Utah cold fusion team. Close analysis of the discourses in the controversy reveals the active construction of working definitions of science and suggests that those definitions ultimately circumscribed the evidential grounds on which the ontological status of cold fusion was a judicated by the scientific community.