Understanding Science: Understanding
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UnderstandingScientific science: indifference: Understanding boredom Understanding science in a Mexican planetarium A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Social Sciences and Law A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Social Sciences and Law 2004 2004 María Alejandra Sánc hez Vázquez Department of Social Anthropology María Alejandra Sánc hez-Vázquez Department of Social Anthropology List of contents Table of contents List of figures 4 List of abbreviations 4 Abstract 5 Declaration 6 Copyright statement 6 Acknowledgements 7 Introduction 10 Explaining science: 10 Case one, the Engineer on Mars 10 Case two, the Biologists in Tequila 11 First arguments and first questions 13 A dual approach to the understanding of science 15 Exploring the public understandings 17 The scientists’ understanding of the laity 22 Scientists self image 24 The communication of science 26 Explorations in a planetarium 27 Chapter one: A planetarium’s multiverse 31 The Planetarium 32 The museographic exhibitions 34 The vintage car collection 35 The interactive zone in the Planetarium 37 The astronomy zone 39 The Jurassic world 42 The observatory and the telescopes workshop 42 The gardens 42 Abandoned areas 44 The Planetarium’s multiverse 47 Chapter two: Three ways to sense space 51 An ideal space for the understanding of science? 52 The offices 52 Borderlines 55 The doors 56 The hideouts 59 Meaningful spaces, spatial practices 60 The Planetarium’s great divide 61 Visitors in the public spaces 65 2 Chapter three: Explaining and understanding science at the Planetarium 70 Parallel understandings 75 Possible outcomes and their implications 77 From public to private (or private understandings?) 80 The objects take the lead 84 An unacknowledged learning community 85 Ignored to conceive 86 Chapter four: On boredom 91 Boredom and the Planetarium 92 Signs of boredom 95 The stick and the carrot 99 Learning about boredom 101 Boredom in museums 103 Boredom as a social issue 107 Thinking about the invisible 108 Boredom, the eternal enemy? 109 Chapter five: Time, trust and understanding 114 Fear and life-long understanding 114 Timing, competition and the communication of scientific knowledge 120 Participation, belief and trust 128 Under the light of time 134 Chapter six: The unintended understanding of power 139 The first transformation attempts 139 The limits of interactivity 142 The scientists’ participation 144 Dealing with the first volunteers 146 Negotiating the power of science 148 The redefinition of the public 151 The implications for a nation-state 155 The depoliticisation of the advancement of science 161 Conclusion: Understanding science 164 When the individual is made responsible for understanding science… 164 When the scientists are made responsible… 168 When the difficulty of understanding science is made accountable… 169 The unintended understanding of power 169 Bibliography 174 3 List of figures Figure 1. The planetarium and its grass menagerie 32 Figure 2. The Van der Graaf generator 38 Figure 3. The Solar System Room 40 Figure 4. The engines’ ramp 44 Figure 5. The electro-shocks machine 113 Figure 6. The boy and the dinosaur 115 Figure 7. The auditorium on a typical day 138 List of abbreviations NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement Jpfs Just plain folks PUS Public understanding of science NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration UNAM Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México 4 Abstract The subject of this ethnographic research is the promotion of public scientific literacy in a Mexican planetarium. The planetarium, in the process of transition from an established public institution to a privately-funded science centre, provided the opportunity to study a range of perspectives on the public understanding of science and raised important questions about the potential for communicating scientific knowledge within such institutions. I argue that this planetarium is ineffective in some ways but highly effective in unexpected aspects. The physical description of the institutional environments reveals a dull and boring place where staff work day after day in a repetitive, and un-stimulating relationship with the administration of the Centre. It is through the contact between the staff and the visitors that the understanding of science emerges as a possibility. The problem is that the institution sees its role primarily as that of the provider of the media through which science is communicated to the public, ignoring and unintentionally limiting the social interactions through which learning can take place. As a result individuals find it very difficult to engage with the scientific principles embedded in the displays and hence fail to further their understanding of science. This occurs not because the individual fails to understand what is being communicated at a surface level, but because s/he cannot participate and is rendered passive in the communication process. Interactive exhibits designed to draw the visitors in do not greatly increase the social interaction. The thesis shows how the various ways in which interaction is limited foster an attitude of indifference in those who are effectively ignored. Furthermore, the institutional failure in this respect not only prevents better understandings of science, but actually promotes an indifferent attitude towards science turning the visitors into apolitical beings who will not challenge or question the social consequences of contemporary entrepreneurial science. It is thus suggested that this institution, instead of raising the standards of scientific literacy may in fact be fostering a generalised indifference towards the development of science. These points are developed in two ways: By treating the understanding of science as a social and political process; and by addressing the historical problem of the stagnation of the endogenous development of science in Mexico. Scientific activities in Mexico are more strongly connected to transnational scientific networks than they are to local concerns. These circumstances are reflected also in the museum sector and exemplified here with an analysis of three areas of activity: The purchase of transnational interactive technologies, the negotiations for the enrolment of scientists in the entrepreneurial project of transforming the public planetarium into a modern private science centre, and the purposeful ignoring of the communication circuits already established between the planetarium’s staff and the visitors to the centre. Overall the work seeks to highlight the ways in which indifference towards science as much as the idealising discourses of and about science are aiding in the unchallenged reproduction of neoliberal uses of scientific knowledge. 5 Declaration No portion of the work referred to in the thesis/dissertation has been submitted in support of an application for another degree or qualification of this or any other university or other institute of learning. Copyright statement Copyright in text of this thesis/dissertation rests with the Author. Copies (by any process) either in full, or of extracts, may be made only in accordance with instruction given by the Author and lodged in the John Rylands University Library of Manchester. Details may be obtained from the Librarian. This page must form part of any such copies made. Further copies (by any process) of copies made in accordance with such instructions may not be made without the permission (in writing) of the Author. The ownership of any intellectual property rights which may be described in this thesis/dissertation is vested in the University of Manchester, subject to any prior agreement to the contrary, and may not be made available for use by third parties without the written permission of the University, which will prescribe the terms and conditions of any such agreement. Further information on the conditions under which disclosures and exploitation may take place is available from the Head of the Department of Social Anthropology. 6 Acknowledgements Carrying out this research was not boring at all, although some chapters may thus imply. It is thanks to the people I met through this experience, but especially thanks to those who accompanied me through this long journey that the past four years have become a mind blowing personal story. First of course I thank the Mexican Council for Science and Technology for funding this opportunity which would otherwise have been impossible to undertake. Next, I thank the people of the Department of Social Anthropology in the University of Manchester for all their unremitting support. To the people in the Planetarium, thank you. I know I remained as an intruder until the end of my stay, but you put up with me and my questions; you invited me to what went on, you were always very respectful to my presence and my work and you allowed me to share the spaces with you. Thanks to Arturo Gallegos, for all your support and interest. Betty, Profesor Miguel Angel, Livier, and all the guides, thanks to you for every day of your company. To my friends in the Planetarium, Maribel and Yolanda, without you it would have been a difficult time. You helped me to understand the extremes and face life differently. Doctor Levy, thanks for trusting in whatever I was doing in the Planetarium. This thesis might come as a surprise to you but I hope that it can help your best projects in some way. Thanks to all the people who amiably allowed me to interview them. To the people working in the Board of Patrons thanks for allowing me to sit in on your meetings. To the scientists involved thanks for the interviews, the coffees, the books, the chats, the lessons. To Brenda, Isela and Leticia Reyes for sharing with me your experiences as popularisers. I will always remember how admirable what you do is. To my friends Ana Ramírez Carr and Don for your hospitality and kindness. To Raul and Alejandra for those years of friendship and the ones to come.