Scientific Identity as the Basis of the Deficit Model

The deficit model of scientific communication has been largely abandoned in its descriptive aspect as inconsistent with reality. However, from our perspective, the deficit model retains enduring popularity in its normative dimension. It is the deficit model, in contrast to others, that emphasizes strict adherence to the boundaries of scientific knowledge’s identity, distinguishing it from all that is non-scientific. In this article, we critique the concept of scientific knowledge’s identity as a value. First, we identify problematic aspects in the intra-structural imperative to preserve scientific identity. On the one hand, the insistence on rigid boundaries conflicts with the need for scientific progress and the generation of new knowledge. Thus, science is already fractured in its normative dimension. On the other hand, numerous studies demonstrate that science fails to maintain its identity in either synchronic or diachronic perspectives. Next, we observe that in its interactions with the external environment, science has never been entirely autonomous; rather, the degree of its identification has been regulated by society, of which science is a functional part. Science merely occupies a privileged social position as long as society grants it a mandate to fulfill this role. Even scientists themselves are guided by far more than just scientific epistemic practices. We argue that the most effective model of communication lies midway between the dialogic and participatory models.