Project title : Dynamics of scientific imaginary in Romanian, Swiss and French media.

Historical and metaphorical representations of sciences as myth Postdoc researcher: Alina POPA, Ph.D., (associate) professor, „Petru Maior” University, Targu-Mures, Romania M.A. in progress, Al.I.Cuza University, Iasi E-mail: aliapopa@yahoo.com Fax: +40-232-273814 Phone: +40-728096779 Project Summary The research will evolve around the notion of imagination, following the tradition established by Bachelard, Durand and Wunenburger, in an attempt to capture the system of correspondences and dissonances of the representations of sciences, as portrayed by mass-media, in three states known for their historical cultural affinity. While assuming the intrinsic dynamics of the notion of imaginary (as it is used in French literature – l’imaginaire, since English seems to lack a specific notion in the field), we aim to capture both the petrified and 'permanent' part of these representations (Boia, 2000), the functional stereotypes which represent the hard core of the scientific imaginary, as well as the areas permeable to transformations and, especially, the effects they generate on fantasies, clichés, and prejudices about sciences impregnated in the collective imaginary. This project aims to investigate, with the methodological tools provided by social sciences and, in particular, those of the communication sciences, the scientific imagery and its dynamics over the six decades (1945-2010) in Romania, Switzerland and France as it was shaped by the remarkable technical and social developments (the ideological and national reconfiguration after 1945, the development of mass media, the re-democratization of South-Eastern Europe, the expansion of the use of ICT and the emergence of new social classes: digital-literate / illiterate, digital-native/ immigrant). Problems.

This proposal tries to exploit and unify directions of research which appear on the

agenda of European and international bodies and research institutes. One of the sections of

the European Program FP7 - Capacities, for example, called "Science and Society", aims to

investigate the place of sciences in society, the image of sciences within the digital era, the

role of universities in the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge, the increased

confidence of large communities of people in sciences etc. This project is in line with these

interests, aiming, at the same time, to provide an integrative view of science and societies in

transition towards full democracy in Eastern Europe in terms of how they interact and

communicate.

The research will evolve around the notion of imagination, following the tradition

established by Bachelard, Durand and Wunenburger, in an attempt to capture the system of

correspondences and dissonances of the representations of sciences, as portrayed by mass-

media, in two states known for their historical cultural affinity. While assuming the intrinsic

dynamics of the notion of imaginary (as it is used in French literature – l’imaginaire, since

English seems to lack a specific notion in the field), we aim to capture both the petrified and

'permanent' part of these representations (Boia, 2000), the functional stereotypes which

represent the hard core of the scientific imaginary, as well as the areas permeable to

transformations and, especially, the effects they generate on fantasies, clichés, and

prejudices about sciences impregnated in the collective imaginary.

From the view of the communication sciences, the relationship between science and

its public was longtime approached according to the canonical model of communication (S.

Shapin, 1990): scientists are the ones that produce knowledge, they also are those that diffuse

it with the intention to educate the masses, but also to legitimize the social use of science.

Challenged today, the canonical model is blamed to operate too clear distinctions between

science, science popularization and general perception on public (J. Gregory, S. Miller,

1998), although, in our opinion, the theory may be useful in providing primary evidence of

what can be considered the effective communication of science.

A study of the British Royal Society in 2006 shows that scientists define their

interaction with the public in terms of "information, explaining, promoting mutual

understanding", without mentioning direct dialogue or interaction among the ways of

achieving these goals. Under these circumstances, communicating sciences requires a

complex perspective taking into account the active, the interactive character of the

relationship between science and public. The uni-directional, canonical model must be

supplemented with an interactive component, so the exchange of knowledge and skills that

occurs in communicating sciences as in any act of communication to be adequately

emphasized. As such, the growing interest of researchers towards the channels used to

disseminate the scientific information is fully legitimate, since new media seem to rely

precisely on interactivity. Although it seems easy to elucidate, the problem of choosing the

optimal broadcast channel for scientific information is far from being solved. Recent studies

(Princeton, 2005) shows that Internet and, in general, new media have a much lower

penetration than television, for example, and an equalization is not foreseen in the next few

years.

The repositioning of science in society through dialogue and participation occurred in

time, along with the development of mass communication technologies. In a report on the

Optimization of the public understanding of science, U. Felt identifies four stages in the

process of restructuring the relationship between the science and society. The first stage,

visible at the end of 1970, called poor approach (deficit approach), is sized similar to the

communication model of sender-receiver. Thus, the sender was the scientist who transposes

the scientific knowledge in a simplified language for an amorphous, undifferentiated and

passive public. The performative stage of communicating sciences (performative character of

communication of science) came amid the intensification of environmental, pacifist of

feminist movements, criticizes the simplification of knowledge, proposing a "re-building of

both the public and his vision of science" (U. Felt, 2004), based on the principle of the non-

identity of individuals. It is thus outlined the idea of differentiated, diverse and re-active

audiences. The third stage (atributting meaning), in which we can speak of a genuine process

of science institutionalization and shaped since the '80s, brings into attention the public space

and identify several structural segments of the public: from the careful (attentive) public, to

the concerned (interested) one and the non-attentive public - which represents the majority.

What is specific to this last stage is the questioning of the use of the gained knowledge and

the immediate assignation of meanings to the scientific information. Finally, the last step

(dialogue and participation), when science and society seem to have understood the

importance of direct communication, has its critics as well. The authority of science is

incriminated because, in an age of communication, it seems to play the role of a filter

between knowledge and public. The research institutes are accused of secularization by

seizing authority in the space of knowledge (Logan, 1991). Contrary views have advocated

the acceptance of science as a knowledge provider, based on the two-steps-flow model in

transmitting information.

Objectives.

This project aims to investigate, with the methodological tools provided by social

sciences and, in particular, those of the communication sciences, the scientific imagery and

its dynamics over the six decades (1945-2010) as it was shaped by the remarkable technical

and social developments (the ideological and national reconfiguration after 1945, the

development of mass media, the re-democratization of South-Eastern Europe, the expansion

of the use of ICT and the emergence of new social classes: digital-literate / illiterate, digital-

native/ immigrant).

The public perception of science balanced, in Romania - and, apparently, in other

European countries as well - between a "tele-mitology", usually validated and accepted

instantly, and a strong opacity against the scientific contents disseminated in public spaces in

a direct manner, without mass-media. We refer here mainly to the Romanian educational

system that seems unable to rally to the global scientific and technical development. Besides

the general lack of interest towards the scientific knowledge among young people enrolled in

the public educational system, countries in transition - as is the case of Romania – are not

able to exploit their assets in research nor to make them properly known in order to create the

premises of a re-turn to science. From this point of view, Romanian’s case can bring

important contributions to understanding the crystallization of the scientific imaginary in a

space (S-E Europe) with common notes. The technological development from recent years

and the growing scale of using ICT seem to be doubled in Romania - paradoxically – by a

more and more fierce religiosity. In other words, we use computers and mobile phones daily,

while deeply believing in God and talking about the opportunity of taking icons into schools.

It must be envisioned here a very personal way to perceive and accept the co-existence of two

otherwise divergent dimensions (the techno-social and theological dimensions), banned

during the decades of communism.

At first glance, the relation between science and society in Romania developed during

at least three stages: first, after the second WW (1947-1971) relied on reconstruction by

industrialization (in parallel with the nationalization of industry and the collectivization of

agriculture), a process carried out in collaboration with foreign specialists, the next stage

(1971-1989), of Bolshevik (and, later, North Korean) inspiration, involved the specialization

of our own human resources by a controlled diversification of the educational system, in the

sense of the poly-technization of the system - without ensuring an appropriate framework for

practice; the present stage includes a number of directions without any visible connection: on

the one hand, Romania experienced a period of economic and technological progress and on

the other hand the educational system seems unable to sustain this progress with adequate

labor force, mainly due to a lack of cooperation and coordination between undergraduate

education and university education. An excessive appetite to recover what appears to have

been banned or restricted during the communist regime is still obvious. Hence, perhaps, the

appetite for social and humanities faculties (the bourgeois pseudo-sciences of the

communism as sociology, political science or journalism) although the labor market strongly

advertises specialists in technical fields.

From the point of view of sociology, the imaginary (better said, l’imaginaire, fr.), as a

scientific concept established relatively late and claimed by most diverse areas of research

(from history - with its ramifications: history of religions, history of arts, history of

mentalities, history of literature - , to psychology, philosophy, anthropology, sociology, etc.),

is subject to controversies in terms of methodology and thematic circumscription. The

attention for the study of the concept intensified, as the image gained place within the mass

communication techniques, invading society and creating a whole culture devoted to the

(social) usages of images. The interest of researchers to study the concept was sympathetic

with the mass-media behavior (especially television and cinema) who lately rely on the new

technologies in order to represent – by tri-dimensional technical effects - fantastic

scenarios with para-normal, onirical, magical, and utopian elements. The semi-god of this

new popular culture is image and its power comes from the ability to manipulate it.

In this context, to define imagination is rather a process of operating the necessary

distinctions and boundaries, than an actual description and assignation of characteristics. As

Le Goff said, it seems easier to show what imaginary isn’t, than what it really is. A first

difficulty lies, therefore, in the confusion that reigns "in the too rich terminology of the

imaginary: signs, images, symbols, allegories, emblems, archetypes, schemes, illustrations,

dramatic representations, diagrams and synepsis" (Durand, 1977: 71). We will retain all over

the present project only some of the terms, as they were definied by Bachelard, Durand or

Wunenburger. Thus, we will approach the imaginary as referring to "a set of productions,

mental or embodied in the works, based on visual images - painting, drawing,

photography – and on language - metaphor, symbol, story - forming coherent and

dynamic structures revealing a symbolic in the sense of a combination of significances

with its own character and figuratively "(Wunenburger, 2009). For the present study, the

activity of imagination – to imagine - will be addressed mainly in terms of its creative

function ("as intentionality capable of an eidetic perspective”, cf Wunenburger, 2009), the

memory counting only because of its reproductive function. Equally, we will emphasize the

rational components of imaginary, as defined by Durand (1977: 74-75) (the archetype – as a

junction point between the imaginary and the rational processes; the myth – as a dynamic

system of symbols, archetypes and schemes to rationalize which turns the symbols into words

and the archetypes, into ideas).

Revealing the archetypes out of the vision on science proposed by the Romanian,

Swiss and French media is the main objective of our research. We aim that - by

analyzing the evolution of these archetypes, their possible mutual contamination and

the predisposition to form distinct, overlapped or united constellations of images - to

identify and describe, in the end, the history of the scientific imaginary and its coherent

pluralism, in Romania, Switzerland and France, during 1945-2010.

Using the eight functional archetypes agreed by most researchers (1. The belief in

the existence of other realities, 2. the otherness, 3. the double - the belief that human body is

composed of a material and an immaterial, independent element. 4. unity 5. the update or

origins or the permanence of founding myths 6. the deciphering of the future, 7. the escape –

the nostalgia for the past or future; 8. the complementarity of opposites), we will try to

highlight the process undertaken by the Romanian, Swiss and French media to (continuously)

update their symbol systems and, more important, how these archetypes are received and

integrated into the consciousness of communities defined geographically and digitally (in

terms of access to information provided by different communications channels).

Another challenge of our scientific approach is to confront archetypes emerged and

updated in various periods of time during 1945-2010, applying the scale of isotopic

classification of images proposed by Durand (1977: 536-537). At first glance, the

constellations of images that compose the scientific imaginary should enroll and act within

the NOCTURNAL regime. The structuring of these images essentially depends, however, on

the receiver of the representations carried by mass-media. We thus anticipate that we can

isolate within the scientific imaginary both synthetic-dramatic mithemes (for digital-native

audiences), and mystical structure (for digital-immigrant receptors). The principles that

govern each of the two structures are different: on the one hand, the synthetic-dramatic

mithemes are in relation with the principle of direct causality, on the other hand, the mystical

mithemes assume the principle of analogy, and similarity. To what extent this diversity of the

receivers (audiences) determines a diversity of images and representations of science and

what are the processes helping archetypes to crystallize in this case, remains, however, to be

investigated.

Methodology.

We will address the notion of scientific imaginary from a linguistic-iconic perspective,

focusing on the "representative and, therefore, verbalized side" of the composition of the

imaginary (Wunenburger, 2009). Centering the research on discourse and discursive practices

has the advantage of allowing us - beyond the identification, as such, of the functional

archetypes composing the scientific imaginary – to highlight the links between these

structures and the inner logic that makes a representation to be favored at the expense of

another, or a meaning to be accepted over another. Within the cinematic process of the

construction of the imaginary, we can capture the logic of the configuration and prefiguration

of the "clusters" of images and, as well, their indirect second meanings that often generate, at

their turn, as a hypertext, new images.

Methodologically, the analysis will develop among the communities of discourse (the media

discourse), as a space of action and of the construction and circulation of scientific imaginary

in Romania, Switzerland and France. Choosing the location of the project has took into

consideration several aspects: the possibility of having direct access to texts in at least 2

languages, the possibility of exploiting the common semantic fields of these languages (from

this perspective, the research might reveal aspects that concerns the 'grammar " of the

scientific imaginary). Also, the location of the project favors the use of the content analysis

method, especially suitable for investigation concerning the imaginary. The discursive

context determined by the texts and enounces of 3 countries being used to inter-communicate

(socially, politically, culturally) could be significant by itself, revealing not only the plurality

of voices, but, as well, as we anticipate, the correspondence, the unity of the voices. Other

methods to be used are interviews (non-structured and semi-structured) with individuals

representing the audiences and journalists – as the creators of the messages conveying the

primary material for scientific archetypes.

The achievement of the general and specific objectives of the project will be subject

to the implementation of the following actions and activities:

I. to elucidate the mechanisms through which mass-media contribute to the transformation of

science in social objects, from an exploratory perspective settled at the intersection of

technological and social determinism, sociology, anthropology, communication sciences,

psychology and history. The premise of this approach refers to the idea that any interactional

social process is implying and is shaped by a specific communicative activity (A. Gorascu,

2004). The ethnographical description of a social community - in our case, the Romanian and

the French communities - in terms of science communication is thus justified and potentially

explanatory in terms of highlighting the dominant communicative structures.

II. one of the expected results is the elaboration of some "maps of the scientific imaginary"

(temporally and spatially scaled) based on the communicative structures actualized for

communicating sciences. With the help of contrastive and typological analysis, these maps

could become instruments of identification and assessment of the communicative behavior

patterns and of the collective mentality. Following the classification of existing

communicative structure (normative, preconfigured - rituals, routines, stereotypes, habits,

styles -, and institutional) (Gorascu, 2004), we will try to point out, for each of these

structures, the specific notes and their regimes.

III. to identify the semantic fields subordinated to the notion of popularization dissemination

of science in postwar Romania and France and, as a particular case, in Switzerland. The

popularization literature, in the formula consecrated by the communists, has completely

disappeared, being replaced with erratically, occasional and unprofessional productions

developed by TVs, written press or radio. Worse though is the fact that the promotion of

scientific information is now determined solely by the existence of a minimum of

sensationalism. Equally, public space has been invaded by pseudo-sciences such as astrology,

which, by products like horoscope, became omni-present - especially in cyberspace.

IV. to develop a methodology for the identification of the constellation of images generating

a scientific imaginary and, secondly, for the evaluation of the effects of the scientific

archetypes composing the scientific imaginary. At this level, the analysis will take into

account variables such as: the language used in the dissemination of scientific information in

various types of media over the six decades; the average capacity of each of these channels to

optimally reflect a particular field of science (D1 - mathematics, physics, chemistry,

astronomy, D2 - information sciences and engineering, D3 – earth and life sciences; D4 –

humanities and social sciences); the media practices of transforming the scientific discourse

in social discourse (how, when, where, why, with what results?); the effects of the monopoly

of mass-communication techniques on the dissemination of scientific information (especially

among rural communities). We presume the methodology could be used in assessing the

importance, in the efficiency of communicating science, of such factors as: (1) the proximity

- temporal, spatial, emotional, social (2) the prominence – of the subject, the persons involved

/ affected etc., (3) the diversity of sources, (4) the diversity of messages, (5) the diversity of

presentations and representation, (6) the volume of information transmitted (7) the

accessibility, (8) the consistency of images (9) the consistency of the archetypes and, finally,

of the imaginary itself.

V. To respond to the strategic objective by the elaboration of a dictionary of the Romanian,

Swiss and French postwar scientific imaginary. Such a work can reflect in an adequate

manner the transformations of the collective mind on science, as a result of the interactions

with political, social, economic and cultural environments. The entries in the dictionary will

reflect the major scientific themes and, especially, how they were received / distorted by the

interposition of diverse filters between the transmitters and the receivers.

Beyond these results, the postdoc researcher is expected to have 2 papers published or

accepted to be published in internationally indexed journals, with or without an impact factor.

An international conference will be organize, with guest with relevant scientific expertise in

the field, and a volume with the contributions will be published online (and on CD with

ISSN). The researcher and his mentor will attend at least 4 international conferences and will

undertake research stages in Swiss libraries and in France.

Bibliography: Durand, G. (1977), Structurile antropologice ale imaginarului, Univers, București. Durang, G. (1999) , Aventurile imaginii, Nemira, București. Wunenburger, J.J. (2009), Imaginarul, Dacia, Cluj-Napoca. Boia, L. (2000). Pentru o istorie a imaginarului, Humanitas, București. Le Goff, J. (1991), Imaginarul medieval. Eseuri, Meridiane, București. Buse, I. (2008), Du logos au mythos, L’Harmattan, Paris. Buse, I. (2004), Métamorphoses du symbole (Prefaţă de Jean-Jacques Wunenburger), Dacia, Cluj. Lévi-Strauss, C. (1978), Antropologia structurală, Politică, Bucureşti. Compaine, B. M. (1986), Information gaps: Myth or reality. Telecommunications Policy, 10 Watkinson, J. D. (1990), Useful knowledge? Concepts, values, and access in American education, 1776-1840, History of Education Quarterly, 30 Tichenor, P. J., Donohue, G. A., & Olien, C. N. (1970), “Mass media flow and differential growth in knowledge”, Public Opinion Quarter, 34 Gaziano, C. (1984), “Neighborhood newspapers, citizen groups and public affairs knowledge gaps”, Journalism Quarterly, 16 Sears, D., & Freedman, J. (1967), “Selective exposure to information: A critical review”, Public Opinion Quarterly, 31 Atkinson R. (1998), L’intervista narrativa, Raffaello Cortina Adriana Gorascu (2004), „Regimul informaţiei ca infrastructură comunicativă”, in Gabriela Pana Dindelegan (coord), Aspecte ale dinamicii limbii romane actuale, Bucuresti, Editura Universitatii Bucuresti. Laura Pana (coord.) (2006), Modele culturale ale societatii cunoasterii din perspectiva culturii tehnice, Bucuresti, Politehnica Press. Cornel Nicolae Jucan (2006), Sisteme expert in modelarea deciziilor financiare. Sibiu, Alma Mater. Mihai Draganescu (2003)., De la societatea informationala la societatea cunoasterii. Bucuresti, Editura Tehnica. Mihai Draganescu (2001), Societatea informationala si a cunoasterii. Vectorii societatii cunoasterii, Academia Romana, www.edemocratie.ro Tudorel Fatu, Alexandru Tugui, Ce urmeaza dupa societatea informationala?, www.edemocratie.ro ELLUL, Jacques (1964), The Technological Society, USA, Knopf

HABERMAS Jürgen (1992), L’espace public. Archéologie de la publicité comme dimension constitutive de la société bourgeoise, Paris, Payot (1ère édition : 1978) MIEGE Bernard (1997), La société conquise par la communication – 2. La communication entre l'industrie et l'espace public, Grenoble : Presses universitaires de Grenoble, p. 110. BOURE Robert, SURAUD Marie-Gabrielle (1994) « Les revues académiques entre débat scientifique et notoriété », Les revues scientifiques et leurs publics, actes du Séminaire annuel « La communication et l'information entre chercheurs », vol. 3, Université Toulouse 3, p. 10. Steven SHAPIN (1990) “Science and the Public.”, in: R.C. Olby et al. (eds.), Companion to the History of Modern Science, London, Routledge, p. 990-1007 Jane Gregory and Steve Miller (1998), Science in Public. Communication, Culture, and Credibility. London, Perseus Publishing, p. 242-250. The Royal Society, Survey of factors affecting science communication by scientists and engineers, The Royal Society, Research Councils UK, and the Wellcome Trust, London, June 2006 www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=3180 Atkinson R. (1998) L’ intervista narrativa, Raffaello Cortina.