Redrawing the Boundaries of Science? The Case of Credible Photographic Data in Visual Social Sciences

ŠIMŮNEK, Michal. Redrawing the Boundaries of Science? The Case of Credible Photographic Data in Visual Social Sciences. In 2010 International Visual Sociology Association Conference, Bologna, Italy, Thinking, Doing and Publishing Visual Research: The State of the Field? 2010.

Základní údaje

Originální název

Redrawing the Boundaries of Science? The Case of Credible Photographic Data in Visual Social Sciences

Autoři

ŠIMŮNEK, Michal

Vydání

2010 International Visual Sociology Association Conference, Bologna, Italy, Thinking, Doing and Publishing Visual Research: The State of the Field? 2010

---

Další údaje

Typ výsledku

Prezentace na konferencích

Utajení

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Označené pro přenos do RIV

Ne

Organizační jednotka

Fakulta sociálních studií

Klíčová slova česky

věda, fotografie, důvěryhodnost, hranice, ne-věda, vizuální sociální vědy, SSK

Klíčová slova anglicky

science, photography, credibility, boundaries, non-science, visual social sciences, SSK

---

Anotace

V originále

William Mitchell [Mitchell 2002] ascribed to the new academic formations of visual studies and visual social sciences the role of the dangerous supplement to the traditional and established scientific disciplines. Using this Derrida's concept he referred mainly to two things: first, that visual sciences "indicate an incompleteness in the internal coherence" of traditional disciplines and second, that they "open both  disciplines to outside issues that threaten their boundaries" [Mitchell 2002: 167]. Although I agree with Mitchell's argumentation, I would like to push his analysis of inter-discilplinary disputes in a little bit different direction. In my argumentation I thus would like to aim attention at one of the most fascinating issues handled by sociology of scientific knowledge [for lucid concise see Pickering 1992 or Pinch 2007], that is, how scientists defend their intellectual territory, legitimize their endeavor and demarcate the boundaries between science and non-science [see Barnes, Bloor, Henry 1996: 140–168 or several passages in Latour 1987; 1993]. To establish and maintain boundaries between science and non-science  is very complex and historically relative process and I will aim just at on the particular aspect of this issue. Considering the borders of visual social sciences I will concentrate mainly on the questions How visual social scientists produce credible photographic data and scientifically valuable knowledge? How they challenge the incompleteness and ambiguity of photographs? How they defend themselves from the fake self-evidence of photographs? These questions are not new for visual social scientists and we can find several attempts to answer them [see for example Becker 1995, Wagner 2004, Grady 2004, Chaplin 1994 etc.] Contrary to these rather technical considerations I would like to stay on the more general level.  Drawing on the Garfinkel's [1968] concept of social indexicality I will describe and illustrate several tactics of credibility production by multiplying photographic indexicality (Barthes's concepts of anchoring [1988] and punctum [1980] ,  Schaeffer's concept of arché [1987] and for example Batchen's [2004] concept of double indexicality) and try to delimit differences and similarities between these tactics employed in science and in non-scientific uses of photography. On the basis of this argumentation and in the context of massive de-contextualisation and re-contextualisation of visual culture [Rubinstein, Sluis 2008] I will conclude with suggesting the answer to the question Do visual social sciences threaten established boundaries between science and non-science?