What is a non-expert audience? How do you see these characteristics of non-experts reflected in the ways a science blog is written?
What contexts do science blog writers have to contend with? To what extent might their writing be helped or hindered by current events and other “common knowledge” that readers bring?
How would you describe the “discourse community” (McMillan 110) represented in writing for non-experts?
By composing a thesis-driven essay in response to any of the above questions, you will be working toward two objectives:
Generate insights into writing that will transfer to your writing in upcoming Assignments for Weeks 4-7.
Create another artifact and set of experiences, along with your literacy narrative, that you can use to write about for final exam: The Self-Reflective Portfolio.
Guiding Your Comparative Genre Analysis
Pick one of the questions listed above, and develop a response in a 700-1000 word thesis-driven essay.
To develop your essay, draw on the following examples of science blog and scientific writing. Select the tabs to compare.
Writing for Non-Experts
Writing for Experts
Sample solution
Dante Alighieri played a critical role in the literature world through his poem Divine Comedy that was written in the 14th century. The poem contains Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. The Inferno is a description of the nine circles of torment that are found on the earth. It depicts the realms of the people that have gone against the spiritual values and who, instead, have chosen bestial appetite, violence, or fraud and malice. The nine circles of hell are limbo, lust, gluttony, greed and wrath. Others are heresy, violence, fraud, and treachery. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Dante’s Inferno in the perspective of its portrayal of God’s image and the justification of hell.
In this epic poem, God is portrayed as a super being guilty of multiple weaknesses including being egotistic, unjust, and hypocritical. Dante, in this poem, depicts God as being more human than divine by challenging God’s omnipotence. Additionally, the manner in which Dante describes Hell is in full contradiction to the morals of God as written in the Bible. When god arranges Hell to flatter Himself, He commits egotism, a sin that is common among human beings (Cheney, 2016). The weakness is depicted in Limbo and on the Gate of Hell where, for instance, God sends those who do not worship Him to Hell. This implies that failure to worship Him is a sin.
God is also depicted as lacking justice in His actions thus removing the godly image. The injustice is portrayed by the manner in which the sodomites and opportunists are treated. The opportunists are subjected to banner chasing in their lives after death followed by being stung by insects and maggots. They are known to having done neither good nor bad during their lifetimes and, therefore, justice could have demanded that they be granted a neutral punishment having lived a neutral life. The sodomites are also punished unfairly by God when Brunetto Lattini is condemned to hell despite being a good leader (Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). While he commited sodomy, God chooses to ignore all the other good deeds that Brunetto did.
Finally, God is also portrayed as being hypocritical in His actions, a sin that further diminishes His godliness and makes Him more human. A case in point is when God condemns the sin of egotism and goes ahead to commit it repeatedly. Proverbs 29:23 states that “arrogance will bring your downfall, but if you are humble, you will be respected.” When Slattery condemns Dante’s human state as being weak, doubtful, and limited, he is proving God’s hypocrisy because He is also human (Verdicchio, 2015). The actions of God in Hell as portrayed by Dante are inconsistent with the Biblical literature. Both Dante and God are prone to making mistakes, something common among human beings thus making God more human.
To wrap it up, Dante portrays God is more human since He commits the same sins that humans commit: egotism, hypocrisy, and injustice. Hell is justified as being a destination for victims of the mistakes committed by God. The Hell is presented as being a totally different place as compared to what is written about it in the Bible. As a result, reading through the text gives an image of God who is prone to the very mistakes common to humans thus ripping Him off His lofty status of divine and, instead, making Him a mere human. Whether or not Dante did it intentionally is subject to debate but one thing is clear in the poem: the misconstrued notion of God is revealed to future generations.
References
Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). Dante’s inferno: Seven deadly sins in scientific publishing and how to avoid them. Addiction Science: A Guide for the Perplexed, 267.
Cheney, L. D. G. (2016). Illustrations for Dante’s Inferno: A Comparative Study of Sandro Botticelli, Giovanni Stradano, and Federico Zuccaro. Cultural and Religious Studies, 4(8), 487.
Verdicchio, M. (2015). Irony and Desire in Dante’s” Inferno” 27. Italica, 285-297.
Understanding Non-Expert Audiences in Science Blog Writing
In the realm of science communication, catering to non-expert audiences poses unique challenges and opportunities for writers. A non-expert audience refers to individuals who may lack specialized knowledge or technical expertise in a particular field, such as science. In this essay, we will explore how the characteristics of non-experts influence the writing style of science blogs, the contexts science blog writers contend with, and the discourse community represented in writing for non-experts.
Characteristics of Non-Experts Reflected in Science Blog Writing
Non-expert audiences often exhibit characteristics such as limited technical vocabulary, a preference for accessible language, and a desire for engaging and relatable content. In science blog writing, these characteristics are reflected in several ways:
1. Simplified Language: Science blog writers often use layman’s terms and avoid jargon to ensure that complex scientific concepts are easily understood by non-experts.
2. Analogies and Examples: Writers frequently employ analogies, real-world examples, and storytelling techniques to clarify abstract ideas and make connections with readers’ everyday experiences.
3. Visuals and Multimedia: Incorporating visuals, infographics, videos, and interactive elements enhances non-experts’ comprehension and engagement with scientific content.
4. Narrative Structure: Science blogs may adopt a narrative structure to present information in a cohesive and engaging manner, guiding readers through a story that unfolds around scientific topics.
These strategies help bridge the gap between scientific expertise and non-specialist audiences, making complex concepts more accessible and engaging for a broader readership.
Contexts and Challenges Faced by Science Blog Writers
Science blog writers operate within various contexts that shape the content and tone of their writing. Current events, societal trends, and readers’ existing knowledge play crucial roles in influencing how writers craft their narratives:
1. Relevance of Current Events: Writers must stay attuned to current scientific discoveries, breakthroughs, controversies, or public debates to provide timely and relevant content that resonates with readers.
2. Common Knowledge: Acknowledging readers’ existing knowledge levels and preconceptions about science helps writers tailor their explanations, avoid assumptions, and address potential misconceptions effectively.
3. Diverse Audiences: Science blog writers must cater to diverse audiences with varying levels of scientific literacy, ensuring that their content remains informative yet accessible to a wide range of readers.
While current events and common knowledge can enrich science blog writing by providing context and relevance, they can also pose challenges by necessitating accurate and nuanced explanations that balance complexity and clarity.
Discourse Community in Writing for Non-Experts
Writing for non-experts in the context of science blogs forms a distinct discourse community characterized by shared goals, practices, and expectations. This community serves as a bridge between scientific experts and lay audiences, fostering communication and knowledge dissemination:
1. Shared Goals: The discourse community of science blog writing aims to promote scientific literacy, inspire curiosity, debunk myths, and foster a deeper understanding of complex scientific topics among non-experts.
2. Collaborative Practices: Writers within this community often collaborate with scientists, educators, editors, and illustrators to create content that is accurate, engaging, and accessible to diverse audiences.
3. Interactive Engagement: Science blog writers encourage reader interaction through comments, feedback mechanisms, social media platforms, and multimedia elements to foster a sense of community and dialogue around scientific issues.
By engaging with readers, responding to feedback, and adapting their writing strategies based on audience needs, writers contribute to the collective knowledge-sharing efforts within the discourse community of science blog writing.
In conclusion, writing for non-expert audiences in science blogs requires writers to employ clear language, engaging storytelling techniques, visual aids, and contextual relevance to make complex scientific concepts accessible and captivating. By navigating the dynamic contexts of current events, common knowledge among readers, and the collaborative discourse community of science communication, writers can bridge the gap between scientific expertise and public understanding, fostering a culture of curiosity, learning, and engagement in the realm of science communication.
