In this paper, we respond to a critique by Erik Thorstensen of the ‘Deepening Ethical Engagement and Participation in Emerging Nanotechnologies’ (DEEPEN) project concerning its ‘realist’ treatment of narrative, its restricted analytical framework and resources, its apparent confusion in focus and its unjustified contextualisation and overextension of its findings. We show that these criticisms are based on fairly serious misunderstandings of the DEEPEN project, its interdisciplinary approachand its conceptual context. Having responded to Thorstensen’s criticisms, we take the opportunity to clarify and develop our approach to narrative. We articulate the need for novel, theoretically robust approaches to the formation of public attitudes which transcend the limitations of both survey-based approaches—which remain wedded to methodological individualism and which presume that individuals hold distinct and relatively stable attitudes and preferences—and interactionist approaches to public talk, which focus too strongly on individuals-in-interaction as reasoning agents and which ignore the constitutive role of culture and discourse in the formation of public opinion. We suggest that our use of narrative can help to better understand the process through which public attitudes to emerging technology develop out of interactive an engagement with wider cultural arguments and accounts of  science and technology. We finish by pointing to parallel developments in social thought—from Charles Taylor’s treatment of social imaginaries to recent developments in post-Bourdieuian cultural sociology—as related projects in understanding the cultural resources and grammars that provide the conceptual infrastructure for modern social life.83241250Ferrari, A., Developments in the debate on nanoethics: traditional approaches and the need for new kinds of analysis (2010) NanoEthics, 4 (2), pp. 27-52Ferrari, A., Alfred, A., Beyond conversation: some lessons for nanoethics (2010) NanoEthics, 4 (2), pp. 171-181Kearnes, M.B., Rip, A., The emerging governance landscape of nanotechnology (2009) Jenseits von regulierung: Zum politischen umgang mit der nanotechnologie, , Gammel S, Lösch A, Nordmann A, (eds), Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft, BerlinShelley-Egan, C., The ambivalence of promising technology (2010) NanoEthics, 4 (2), pp. 183-189Shelley-Egan, C., Davies, S.R., Nano-industry operationalizations of ‘responsibility’: charting diversity in the enactment of responsibility (2013) Rev Policy Res, 30 (5), pp. 588-604Carvalho, A., Nunes, J.A., Technology, methodology and intervention: performing nanoethics in Portugal (2013) NanoEthics, 7 (2), pp. 149-160Law, J., (2004) After method: mess in social science research, , Routledge, LondonFitzgerald, D., Littlefield, M.L., Knudsen, K.J., Tonks, J., Dietz, M.J., Ambivalence, equivocation and the politics of experimental knowledge: a transdisciplinary neuroscience encounter (2014) Soc Stud Sci, 44 (5), pp. 701-721Balmer, A.S., Bulpin, K.J., Left to their own devices: post-ELSI, ethical equipment and the international genetically engineered machine (iGEM) competition (2013) Biogeosciences, 8, pp. 311-335Balmer AS, Marris C, Calvert J, Molyneux-Hodgson S, Kearnes M, Bulpin K, Mackenzie A, Schyfter P, Frow E, Martin P (2014 forthcoming) Reflections on working in post-elsi spaces: taking roles in interdisciplinary collaborations. Science and Technology Studies (the EASST journalCalvert, J., Doorn, N., Schuurbiers, D., van de Poel, I., Gorman, M.E., Collaboration as a research method? Navigating social scientific involvement in synthetic biology. In (2013) Early engagement and new technologies: opening up the laboratory. Springer, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, Volume 16, Dordrech, pp. 175-194Dupuy, J.-P., The narratology of lay ethics (2010) NanoEthics, 4 (2), pp. 153-170Macnaghten, P., Davies, S., Kearnes, M.B., Narrative and public engagement: some findings from the DEEPEN project (2010) Understanding public debate on nanotechnologies: options for framing public policies, pp. 13-29. , Schomberg R, Davies S, (eds), European Commission, BrusselsLaw, J., Urry, J., Enacting the social (2004) Econ Soc, 33 (3), pp. 390-410Lury, C., Wakeford, N., (2012) Inventive methods: the happening of the social, , (eds), Routledge, AbingdonLaw, J., The device: the social life of methods (2013) Special issue of The Journal of Cultural Economy, 6 (3)Billig, M., (1987) Arguing and thinking: a rhetorical approach to social psychology, , Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCameron, D., (2001) Working with spoken discourse, , Sage, LondonHeller, A., European master narratives about freedom (2005) Handbook of contemporary european social theory, pp. 257-265. , Delanty G, (ed), Routledge, LondonBlumenberg, H., (2010) Paradigms for a metaphorology translated Robert Savage, , Cornell University Press, IthacaBlumenberg, H., Work on myth. MIT Press (1988) Translated R, , Wallace, PrincetonNora, P., Between memory and history: les lieux de mémoire (1989) Representations, 26, pp. 7-24Arendt, H., (1991) On revolution, , Penguin, HarmondsworthLévi-Strauss, C., (1966) The savage mind, , University of Chicago Press, ChicagoDavies, S.R., Macnaghten, P., Reconfiguring responsibility: lessons for public policy (Part 1 of the report on Deepening Debate on Nanotechnology), , Durham University, DurhamMiller, D., (2013) Tales from Facebook, , Wiley, ChichesterTurkle, S., (2011) Alone together: why we expect more from technology and less from each other, , Basic Books, New YorkKearnes, M., Wynne, B., On nanotechnology and ambivalence: the politics of enthusiasm (2007) NanoEthics, 1 (2), pp. 131-142Davies, S.R., Macnaghten, P., Narratives of mastery and resistance: lay ethics of nanotechnology (2010) NanoEthics, 4 (2), pp. 141-151Davies, S., Kearnes, M., Macnaghten, M., All things weird and scary’: nanotechnology, theology, and religious affiliations (2009) Cult Relig, 10 (2), pp. 201-220Kearnes, M.B., Chaos and control: nanotechnology and the politics of emergence (2006) Paragraph, 29 (2), pp. 57-80Kearnes, M., Macnaghten, P., Wilsdon, J., (2006) Governing at the nanoscale, , People Policies and Emerging Technologies, LondonDavies, S., How we talk when we talk about nano: the future in laypeople’s talk (2011) Futures, 43 (3), pp. 317-326Macnaghten, P., Animals in their nature: a case study on public attitudes to animals, genetic modification and ‘nature’ (2004) Sociology, 38 (3), pp. 533-551Macnaghten, P., Grove-White, R., Jacobs, M., Public perceptions and sustainability in Lancashire: indicators, institutions (1995) and participation, , A report by the Centre for the Study of Environmental Change commissioned by Lancashire County Council, LancasterMyers, G., Macnaghten, P., Rhetorics of environmental sustainability: commonplaces and places (1998) Environ Plan A, 30, pp. 333-353Macnaghten, P., Urry, J., (1998) Contested natures, , Sage, LondonLee, C.J., Scheufele, D.A., Lewenstein, B.V., Public attitudes toward emerging technologies—examining the interactive effects of cognitions and affect on public attitudes toward nanotechnology (2005) Sci Commun, 27 (2), pp. 240-267Scheufele, D.A., Lewenstein, B.V., The public and nanotechnology: how citizens make sense of emerging technologies (2005) J Nanoparticle Res, 7 (6), pp. 659-667Proctor, J.D., The meaning of global environmental change: retheorising culture in human dimensions research (1998) Glob Environ Chang, 8 (3), pp. 227-248Brossard, D., Scheufele, D.A., Kim, E., Lewenstein, B.V., Religiosity as a perceptual filter: examining processes of opinion formation about nanotechnology (2009) Public Underst Sci, 18 (5), pp. 546-558Gaskell, G., Ten Eyck, T., Jackson, J., Veltri, G., Public attitudes to nanotech in Europe and the United States (2004) Nat Mater, 3 (8), p. 496Scheufele, D.A., Corley, E.A., Shih, T.-J., Dalrymple, K.E., Ho, S.S., Religious beliefs and public attitudes toward nanotechnology in Europe and the United States (2009) Nat Nanotechnol, 4, pp. 91-94Strauss, A.L., Social worlds and their segmentation processes (1984) Stud Symb Interact, 5, pp. 123-139Strauss, A.L., (1987) Qualitative analysis for social scientists, , Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGarfinkel, H., (1967) Studies in ethnomethodology, , Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoffman, E., (1981) Forms of talk, , University of Pennsylvania Press, PhiladephiaGoffman, E., (1974) Frame analysis: an essay on the organisation of the experience, , Harvard University Press, CambridgeLynch, M., (1993) Scientific practice and ordinary action: ethnomethodology and social studies of science, , Cambridge University Press, CambridgeAustin, J.L., (1962) How to do things with words, , Oxford University Press, OxfordHoffman, M., Linell, P., Lindh-Åstrand, L., Kjellgren, K.I., Risk talk: rhetorical strategies in consultations on hormone replacement therapy (2003) Health Risk Soc, 5 (2), pp. 139-154Horlick-Jones, T., Informal logics of risk: contingency and modes of practical reasoning (2005) J Risk Res, 8 (3), pp. 253-272Horlick-Jones, T., Prades, A., On interpretative risk perception research: some reflections on its originsits natureand its possible applications in risk communication practice (2009) Health Risk Soc, 11 (5), pp. 409-430Horlick-Jones, T., Walls, J., Kitzinger, J., Bricolage in action: learning about, making sense of, and discussing, issues about genetically modified crops and food (2007) Health Risk Soc, 9 (1), pp. 83-103Sarangi, S., Bennett, K., Howell, L., Clarke, A., ‘Relatively speaking’: relativisation of genetic risk in counselling for predictive testing (2003) Health Risk Soc, 5 (2), pp. 155-170Wall, E., Structure of meaning and sense-making of risk: an operationalisation of sense-making tested by grouping individuals according to their structure of meaning (2011) J Risk Res, 14 (6), pp. 735-755Horlick-Jones, T., On the signature of new technologies: sociality, materiality and practical reasoning (2007) Risk and the public acceptability of new technologies, , Flynn R, Bellaby P, (eds), Palgrave, BasingstokeCallon, M., Lascoumes, P., Barthe, Y., (2009) Acting in an uncertain world: an essay on technical democracy, , The MIT Press, CambridgeBijker, W.E., (1995) Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: toward a theory of sociotechnical change, , MIT Press, CambridgeBijker, W.E., Law, J., (1992) Shaping technology/building society, , (eds), MIT Press, CambridgeLaw, J., Hassard, J., (1999) Actor network theory and after, , (eds), Blackwell, OxfordFischer, M.M.J., (2003) Emergent forms of life and the anthropological voice, , Duke University Press, DurhamJasanoff, S., (2005) Designs on nature: science and democracy in Europe and the United States, , Princeton University Press, PrincetonMarcus, G.E., (1995) Technoscientific imaginaries: conversations, profiles and memoirs, , (ed), University of Chicago Press, ChicagoJasanoff, S., Kim, S.-H., Sperling, S., Sociotechnical imaginaries and science and technology policy: a cross-national comparison (2007) Harvard University, , Research report, Cambridge, M.ATaylor, C., (2004) Modern social imaginaries, , Duke University Press, DurhamMacnaghten, P., Researching technoscientific concerns in-the-making: narrative structures, public responses and emerging nanotechnologies (2010) Environ Plan A, 42, pp. 23-37Alexander, A., Giesen, B., Mast, J., (2006) Social performance: symbolic action, cultural pragmatics, and ritual, , Cambridge University Press, CambridgeLamont, M., Camic, C., (2011) Gross N (eds), , Social knowledge in the making, vol University of Chicago Press, ChicagoLamont, M., Thévenot, L., (2000) Rethinking comparative cultural sociology: repertoires of evaluation in France and the United States, , (eds), Cambridge University Press, CambridgeSchatzki, T., Knorr-Cetina, K., von Savigny, E., (2001) The practice turn in contemporary theory, , (eds), Routledge, LondonThévenot, L., The plurality of cognitive formats and engagements: moving between the familiar and the public (2007) Eur J Soc Theory, 10 (3), pp. 409-423Weber, M., Economy and society: an outline of interpretive sociology (1978) University of California Press, , Edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich, BerkeleyBoltanski, L., Thévenot, L., (2006) On justification, , Princeton University Press, CambridgeLamont, M., Thévenot, L., Introduction: toward a renewed comparative cultural sociology (2000) Rethinking comparative cultural sociology: repertoires of evaluation in France and the United States, pp. 1-22. , Lamont M, Thévenot L, (eds), Cambridge University Press, CambridgeSilber, I.F., Pragmatic sociology as cultural sociology: beyond repertoire theory? (2003) Eur J Soc Theory, 6 (4), pp. 427-449Marx, K., The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon. Charles H. Kerr & Company (1907) Trans, , Daniel De Leon, ChicagoHajer, M.A., Versteeg, W., A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: achievements, challenges, perspectives (2005) J Environ Policy Plan, 7 (3), pp. 175-184Spillman, L., (2002) Cultural sociology, , (ed), Blackwell, OxfordSwidler, A., Culture in action: symbols and strategies (1986) Am Sociol Rev, 51 (2), pp. 273-286Jasanoff, S., Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science (2003) Minerva, 41 (3), pp. 223-244Wynne, B., Public engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science—hitting the notes, but missing the music? (2006) Community Genet, 9 (3), pp. 211-220Macnaghten P, Kearnes M, Davies S (2015 forthcoming) Anticipating public responses to emerging technologies: a narrative approach. J Environ Policy Pla