| المستخلص: |
يتناول البحث صعوبات استخدام اللغة العلمية التي تواجه الباحث عند صياغة نتائج أبحاثة بهدف تقديمها للعامة. و يشير البحث الى صعوبات تصل في الجدية الى حد يجعل من التساؤل الفلسفي عن موثوقية اللغة المستخدمة لصياغة التقارير العلمية ضروروة ملحة. كما يؤكد البحث على خضوع المادة العلمية لعدة مستويات من التغيرات عند صياغتها كمادة قابلة للنشر قد تصل في عمقها الى حد تغيير مضمون المادة العلمية- أي كما كانت قبل تسويقها للرأي العام-.هذا البحث يوضح بعضا من هذه الاشكالات بهدف القاء مزيد من الضوء على الاشكالية الفلسفية لموثوقية لغة التقارير العلمية.
This article discuses difficulties of communicating scientific knowledge. It argues for the seriousness of those difficulties to the degree that can affect the reliability and credibility of scientific reporting, especially when it comes to reporting to the public. As I argue in this article, scientific knowledge becomes apt to many kinds of changes when introduced to the public; some of these changes are serious enough to raise questions regarding the authenticity of the scientific content. In the paper, I explain those difficulties and call to question the philosophical reasons we have to trust scientific public language. With no doubt, scientific writing is not like any other kind of writing. The many difficulties that may face any scientist when decides to write, more precisely speaking, when decides to write for the public, causes a problematic kind of change, the change that takes place when the scientific project turns from being an isolated personal effort that takes place in isolated laboratories to a public industry, after the results of this effort are published. Difficulties of scientific reporting are more related to the process of introducing the scientific research results to the public than being related to the production of the scientific outcomes themselves. But their mere existence suggests the following questions: does the scientific truth remain the same before and after it is published? If not, what changes take place? And how fundamental these changes can be? Do they justify us suspect the originality of the scientific truth or not? More importantly, to whom do scientists address their work? Is it the scientific society or the common? If it is the first, the question will be: which scientific environment the results must be addressed to? Are they colleges in the same field of specialization, or is it simply the wider surrounding scientific community? Also, in what ways do scientists change their outcomes before presenting them to the public? How can such an alteration affect the structure of the scientific truth after this truth takes the shape of a report? In other words, how can the transformation of the scientific knowledge, from the darkness of the laboratories to the dazzling lightness of scientific conferences affect the core of this knowledge? However, out of all these questions, the most important question to be answered is about the degree of which we can trust scientists when they claim they are telling us the truth; this question which will be the main concern of this article.
|
