首页> 外文OA文献 >Espace public et champ scientifique : la publicisation des agents scientifiques sous l’emprise de l’idéologie de la vulgarisation
【2h】

Espace public et champ scientifique : la publicisation des agents scientifiques sous l’emprise de l’idéologie de la vulgarisation

机译:公共空间与科学领域:大众化意识形态影响下的科学代理人宣传

摘要

We observe from the 1970s theoretical models and diversification mechanisms of scientific publicizing seeing compile the three forms are popular, scientific and cultural activities more recently public debate establishing a democratic dialogue in social controversies scientists. This phenomenon of theoretical diversification takes place at the intersection of issues combining epistemological, communicative and ultimately political questions. However, if the philosopher Jürgen Habermas saw a direct determination of epistemological positioning of actors / agents research into their communication practices within such devices, this perspective appears ill-suited in terms of observations and contemporary sociological theory. A theoretical practice giving a prevalence of the theory of communicative practice can satisfactorily address or social issues taking place in the theory itself, or to objectify so distanced phenomena own objectification of social relations complex science companies. The main risk is the integration of cultural norms and values ​​of a specific scientific field in the results of theoretical activities themselves socio-professional habitus. This work on the cultural values ​​and practices of the actors / agents involved in the research phenomena publicizing science, we have developed four empirical components in the preparation of a thesis in Information Science and communication. The first three components are based on a semi-structured interview corpus, observations and analysis of content generated by research actors involved in three separate devices and corresponding, within certain limits, the above theoretical models: a popular publication, the 2009 and 2010 editions of the Festival of Science, and the deliberations of the National Commission for Public Debate on Nanotechnology and issues. The fourth part focuses on the study of intra-academic training of doctoral recipients multidisciplinary communication, information and scientific mediation, opening our analysis to the observation of phenomena of socialization research stakeholders by publicizing science . These devices all taking place in the same geographical and temporal context, their study allows us to observe the relationship of convergence between them and potential polypratiques actors / agents research. In a sociological study of scientific communication deployed against the public, extension and its ideological corollary (a "knowledge gap", a "lay public," a "neutral science", etc..) To suggest rather in as a community-based social habitus, participating in a phenomenon of socialization identity and generating perceptual schemes and practicality into the areas of communicative theory and the theory of knowledge. Extension tends to overflow the only part of its formal mechanisms to redefine the practice forms of publicizing theoretically divergent. Devices institutionalized public debates taking place in the socio-scientific controversies conduct staged hegemonic superiority of scientific experience in social experiments "external", modeled on a division of the social world based on a distinction functional. This tradition by helping to define the conditions of access of actors / agents to institutionalized social democratic dialogue instances, is inserted between the potential of participation and representation in public space and prioritize forms of intervention stakeholders / social workers according to their proximity to the alleged instances of construction of scientific knowledge.
机译:我们从1970年代开始观察科学宣传的理论模型和多元化机制,发现三种形式流行起来,而科学和文化活动更是近来的公开辩论,在社会争议科学家中建立了民主对话。这种理论上的多样化现象发生在结合认识论,沟通和最终政治问题的问题交汇处。但是,如果哲学家约尔根·哈贝马斯(JürgenHabermas)直接看到了演员/代理人在这种设备内对其交流实践进行研究的认识论定位,那么从观察和当代社会学理论的角度来看,这种观点似乎是不合适的。盛行交际实践理论的理论实践可以令人满意地解决理论本身中发生的社会问题,或客观化如此遥远的现象,从而使复杂的科学公司对社会关系具有客观性。主要风险是将特定科学领域的文化规范和价值观整合到理论活动本身的社会专业习惯的结果中。这项工作涉及参与宣传科学的研究现象的行为者/代理的文化价值和实践,在准备信息科学和传播学论文时,我们开发了四个经验成分。前三个组成部分基于半结构化访谈语料库,对参与三个独立装置的研究参与者生成的内容进行观察和分析,并在一定范围内对应上述理论模型:热门出版物,2009年和2010年版科学节,以及有关纳米技术和问题的国家公共辩论委员会的审议。第四部分着重研究博士生接受多学科交流,信息和科学调解的学术内部培训,通过对科学的宣传使我们的分析向社会化研究利益相关者现象的观察开放。这些设备都发生在相同的地理和时间环境中,它们的研究使我们能够观察它们与潜在的多学科参与者/代理研究之间的融合关系。在对公众进行科学传播的社会学研究中,扩展及其意识形态的推论(“知识鸿沟”,“非大众”,“中立科学”等)建议以社区为基础的社会习惯,参与社会化认同现象,并在交际理论和知识理论领域产生感知计划和实践。扩展倾向于溢出其形式机制的唯一部分,以重新定义宣传理论上分歧的实践形式。在社会科学争议中进行的装置制度化的公开辩论,在“外部”社会实验中展现了科学经验的霸权优势,该实验以社会世界基于区分功能的划分为模型。通过帮助定义行为者/代理人进入制度化的社会民主对话实例的条件,将这一传统插入公共空间中的参与和代表潜力之间,并根据与涉嫌实例的接近程度,对利益相关者/社会工作者的干预形式进行排序科学知识的建设。

著录项

  • 作者

    Bodin Cyrille;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2013
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 fr
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号