Following the most crucial elements of the implementation of Life & Science in the elite-master program, concentration on the concrete composition of the course and its individual sessions is necessary. When the module Life & Science is structured by its two subtitles “What is Life?” and “What is Science?”, then its effects can be described as working in two directions.

First, in the very general direction of the superior question of the module: What is life science? The question is not central in respect to a definitive answer that is expected from the students at the end of the module. It is central as the question itself to provide students with an elaborate reflection of their studies, their future profession, and their personal role as researchers. If there is an answer, it should be understood as the expression of a personal consideration and individual choice. The result of the course is, in this sense, a thought through attitude that is reliable as well as instructive for one’s future career and research.

Second, the questions give structure to the five individual sessions that shape each of the two semesters of the module. Each session takes one important aspect of life or science as its main topic and elaborates on its specific attributes and meanings.Footnote 3 Starting with the part “What is science?”, the main topics are “Knowledge”, “Consciousness”, “Metaphors”, “Laboratory”, and “Scientific progress”. The main themes of the following semester under the title “What is life?” are “Nature”, “Happiness”, “Drugs”, “Animal rights”, and “Body enhancement” (Fig. 1). Of course, a list of all the important aspects that can be considered when talking about life and science will never be complete. In this sense, the topics are chosen for covering the most important elements and because of their possible function as umbrella terms. Every term covers a variety of different meanings, so that its significance can shift in relation to the discussion’s dynamics during the session. All topics also share the characteristic, that they can be focused at first on the common problem of defining their respective terms or, more precisely, the phenomenon behind each one of them. The question “What is/are …?” could accordingly be added to each of the session’s main topics, in that the question is the ideal opener for the subsequent discussion. It not only opens up a heterogenic if not controversial and contradictory field of different perspectives but also highlights the most important elements for the students and their interests.

General structure of the module Life & Science within the elite-master program Biomedical Neuroscience

Talking, for example about “Nature” according to the explanations given by Thomas Henry Huxley’s “Nature: Aphorisms by Goethe” [19]—the very first article published in Nature—offers a variety of different associations, metaphors, and definitions. And it is for a good part in the hands of the students in what direction they want to push the discussion. They can follow the more romantic pathway of the text that entertains a high reliance on the conviction that “everything speaks” [20] as a fundamental trade of nature. They can take on a critical, investigative attitude by following the text’s rejection of an anthropomorphizing of nature. They can criticize the text itself for its blunt poetics. Especially when told the fact, that the attribution of the extensive quote to Goethe is—most probably—incorrect.Footnote 4 Or, on the contrary, they can follow the poetic traits of the descriptions and discuss their very own truths, when metaphors like “mother” or “circle” are legion and have their own specific way of characterizing the experience of nature.

As a starting point for each session, students have to read one or two articles in preparation for each session. The theme of the respective article lays out central characteristics of the topic—its individual problematization as well as its possible meaning and importance for students. The texts can be instructive and offer guidelines for the discussion. But they can also take on the form of controversial statements that are open to critique from the students. Reading, for example, excerpts from George Lakoff’s and Mark Johnson’s Metaphor’s we live by [21] is in itself first and foremost a highly productive introduction to the topic of linguistics, metaphors, and their impact on everyday as well as scientific thinking. Reading—in contrast—a chapter from Yuval Noah Harari’s Homo deus. A brief history of humankind [22] is in its broad generalizations and often rather crude theorization still an excellent basis for discussion. In its own and more confrontative manner, it supports a lot of different positions towards and against Harari’s point of view that make for a very lively and intriguing discussion.

For both parts of the module, students also have to write a short position paper (approximately 5000 characters) on one of the five topics. The papers must be submitted at least one week ahead of the respective session. They should contain a short summary of the text accompanying the respective topic and a short elaboration of one’s own point of view towards the subject. Finally, it should state at least one question that should be discussed during the session. These questions help clarifying what aspects are most important for the students. Directly asked, they also give an outline for the structure of the session. This once again helps ensuring a discussion that is close to student’s interests and their perspective as scientists.

Further, each student has to submit a more extensive comment (approximately 15,000 characters) on one of the sessions in retrospect (no later than two weeks after the discussion) that is meant to be a more elaborated presentation of student’s thoughts about the topic and the specific aspects that are relevant to them. Position paper and comment are both graded individually by the module responsible. Together with a regular attendance their cross-section represents the final grade of the module.

Besides the questions from the students, the sessions are structured by impulses given by the course manager. These can consist of a quotation, a piece of art, pop culture, or film and video. They are chosen for highlighting specific aspects of the respective topic and to engage with them from another angle. Via the analysis of a short text, picture, or film clip, special constellations, details, or ideas can be discovered and transferred to the general topic and its discussion. For example, in the case of the session concentrating on metaphors and their significance for everyday life as well as scientific practice, the analysis of René Magritte’s famous Painting La trahison des images (1929) with its depiction of a pipe and the written statement “Ceci n’est pas une pipe” (“this is not a pipe”) has proven to be very enlightening. Its bold play with images and words contradicting each other is questioning the very nature of language and pictorial representations. Its dilemma opens up new perspectives on science as a discipline that itself is relying heavily on the possibilities of writing and image-generating devices—both of which with their own epistemological and ontological ambivalences.

One last, but especially important element in structuring the sessions of Life & Science is the use of writing exercises. At the beginning and at the end of each session, students are given a specific question related to the topic as a prompt. They are asked to take five minutes to reflect on it and write down an answer. The importance lies in a once again new angle on the topic, but this time in the form of a creative occupation and a fixed result that outlasts the otherwise transitory and ephemeral discussions. As opening and closing statements, the developed texts are the concentrated results of the session that are read aloud by each student for the whole class. In this way, they open up a panorama of the different perspectives and possible discourses that are taking part in the discussion. The session on Happiness, for example, starts with the questions: “When was the last time you felt really happy? Why?” This not only relates the current topic to one’s own lived experience. It also and already presents a variety for different instances and forms of articulation of happiness which can lead directly into the discussion.