Exploring the post-genomic world: differing explanatory and manipulatory functions of post-genomic sciences

Area of Science:

• * Integrative biology, focusing on the societal relevance of omics sciences.
• * Comparative analysis of genetics/genomics and proteomics through a scientific sociology lens.

Background:

• * Richard Lewontin's framework posits that a field's social relevance is tied to its public narrative.
• * Genetics/genomics currently exhibits higher perceived societal relevance than proteomics.

Purpose of the Study:

• * To apply Lewontin's framework (manipulatory and explanatory functions) to compare genetics/genomics and proteomics.
• * To elucidate the differing societal relevance and public narratives of these two fields.
• * To identify factors contributing to the disparity in their perceived social impact.

Main Methods:

• * Qualitative interviews and observations at proteomics conferences.
• * Analysis of the explanatory and manipulatory functions of genetics/genomics and proteomics.
• * Examination of cultural narratives, particularly heredity, in scientific fields.

Main Results:

• * Genetics/genomics possesses a strong cultural narrative and explanatory function, largely driven by the concept of heredity.
• * Proteomics lacks a comparable public narrative and faces challenges due to protein complexity and public comprehension.
• * Three illustrative examples highlight the greater social relevance and narrative strength of genetics/genomics.

Conclusions:

• * The disparity in social relevance between genetics/genomics and proteomics stems from differences in their explanatory functions and public narratives.
• * Proteomics' inherent complexity and limited public understanding impede its societal engagement.
• * Omics sciences may influence social relations differently than previously understood, necessitating updated analyses by social scientists.