Blog · Lecture

And, But, Therefore: why science needs story

Lecture by Randy Olson · marine biologist turned filmmaker

Why do millions of people go to the movies, while only a handful have ever read your thesis? In his SciComm Academy lecture, marine-biologist-turned-filmmaker Randy Olson argued that the difference comes down to one thing scientists rarely train: narrative structure. And his tool for turning the dull into the dramatic is deceptively simple — three little words: And, But, Therefore.

From marine biology to Hollywood

Olson has an unusual CV. He earned a PhD in biology from Harvard and became a tenured professor of marine biology — then walked away from tenure to enrol in film school at the University of Southern California, and spent the next 25 years in and around Hollywood. That double life is exactly what makes his argument land: he has lived on both sides of the divide between people who have data and people who know how to make an audience care.

His conclusion? Scientists can learn a great deal from filmmakers. Unlike scientists, filmmakers obsess over narrative structure — and that structure, not just the subject matter, is what keeps an audience leaning in.

The problem: science told as ‘and, and, and’

Most scientific communication, Olson argues, defaults to a flat list of facts strung together: this is true, and this is true, and this is also true. It’s accurate, but it has no momentum, no tension and no point of arrival. He calls this the AAA form — And, And, And — and it’s the reason so much rigorous work simply bounces off its audience.

There’s an opposite failure mode too. Pile on too many twists and qualifications — despite this, however that, yet the other — and you get the DHY form: so much narrative complication that nobody can follow the thread. Between the boring fact-dump and the confusing tangle sits the sweet spot.

The fix: And, But, Therefore

That sweet spot is the ABT. It captures the three forces every story needs:

And — agreement and setup. You establish the context your audience already accepts.
But — contradiction and conflict. You introduce the problem, the twist, the tension. This is the word most scientists forget, and it’s where story is born.
Therefore — consequence and resolution. You deliver what follows, and why it matters.

It mirrors classic three-act structure, and it works at every scale — a single sentence, a paragraph, an abstract, a grant, a whole talk. A quick example:

ABT in one sentence

Coral reefs support roughly a quarter of all marine life, and they have thrived for millions of years, but warming seas are now bleaching them at record speed; therefore researchers are racing to predict and prevent the next collapse.

Olson didn’t invent the idea so much as notice it everywhere. He traces his own lightbulb moment to a documentary about South Park, in which co-creator Trey Parker described editing scripts by replacing the ‘and’s between story beats with ‘but’s and ‘therefore’s — swapping mere sequence for cause and consequence. Olson built that instinct into a full framework in his book Houston, We Have a Narrative.

The ABT also helps you find what a piece of work is really about — its ‘aboutness’. A model he points to is the geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky’s famous framing: nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. One clause sets up the field; the rest tells you what it all hinges on.

Why narrative works

This isn’t about dumbing science down. Narrative is the structure that makes meaning land. There’s even neuroscience behind it: Princeton’s Uri Hasson has shown that when people follow a story, their brain activity begins to synchronise with the storyteller’s — narrative literally helps a group think together. Facts inform; structure is what makes them stick.

Try it yourself

Olson’s challenge is refreshingly concrete: take your own research and force it into a single ABT sentence. If all you can manage is a chain of ‘and’s, you have information, not a story — so go hunting for your ‘but’ (the tension or open question your work addresses) and your ‘therefore’ (why anyone should care). Use it the next time you open a talk, draft an abstract, or write the first line of a grant.

About the speaker

Randy Olson is a scientist-turned-filmmaker. He completed his PhD in biology at Harvard University and held a tenured professorship in marine biology before leaving academia for USC film school and a long career in and around Hollywood. He now teaches narrative to scientists and doctors around the world, and is the author of books on science storytelling including Houston, We Have a Narrative and Don’t Be Such a Scientist.