The place of synthetic biology in the "big science"

Publish seems to be the watchword of actual science. Pushed more and more by a demand of results, scientists have to submit to the game of political speech to exist in their field of application. Also, speeches given by synthetic biologist are conforming to this need of communication. For example, when Craig Venter (American biologist and entrepreneur) presents us the first living form able to reproduce itself with a genome entirely synthesized by a computer, we can ask ourselves if it is just an advertisement effect to catch some providential investors, or if it’s really what science need to go further.


Differences of speech between real actors and promoters on any science are not only true for synthetic biology. Such a situation is in fact a classic reality and is fully accepted in every scientific fields. Also, we are not really surprised when speeches given by synthetic biologist do not reflect the exact reality we can observe in laboratory. Discussion are indeed particularly oriented in terms of design, standardization and gain research. For Roberta Kwok (science writer), synthetic biologist are more handyman, using of ruse and tricks to make them project work, which is radically different from what they present to general public on presentation. In thus, we can notice that people like Maureen O’Malley (School of Philosophical and Historical Inquiry, Sydney) has created the term of “kludging” to present the way of biologic scientist work.


However, those conception of makeshift-job seems not be shared by each protagonist. Indeed, very pejorative for people who has devoted their life into the understanding of life and the way to modify or improve it. Because, even if the work is not as perfect as the theory, we can actually say that results are here. For many of scientist, this notion of “kludging” is more a way of simplification and vulgarization for general public. It is more question of universality and better-understanding that a true reality. In this, when “makeshift-job” was just true in the first step of synthetically biology, now it tends to reach another level, which would correspond to the discourse proposed by promoters: translate living forms into easier, more understandable, and handle able assemblage of biobricks.


Thus, there is now two major speeches in synthetic biology. One “general public” which is oriented to design and standardization, and one more scientific, in an artisanal way of thinking. Actually, those two concepts are not contradictory but complete each other. Because even if synthetic biology can be similar to a “makeshift-job”, using ruses and tricks, it aims to become a real great engineering science, in which fiddling is just the first step.