Scientific discourse: formation, hybridization, disintermediation

Abstract

Scientific discourse has shifted from discourse within professional communities to open, global discourse in modern society. Analysis of scientific discourse is useful for understanding the role of science in public consciousness, the perception of science, the impact of science on society, the development of new approaches to popularizing science, etc. The purpose of this article is to identify the characteristics of scientific discourse as a historical, dynamic, multifaceted phenomenon and a leading element of modern society. Research results. The formation and dissemination of scientific discourse took place in the process of the institutionalization of science, which was accompanied by the establishment of its structural and normative components, in particular specialized scientific terminology, research methods and methodology, an established scientific style of presenting results, norms of professional research behavior (scientific ethos), as well as the formation of a system of interaction between the institution of science and other social institutions. The evolution of scientific discourse from the author-centered, monological, narrative model that emerged in the early modern period to the object-centered, theoretical, non-narrative discourse of science in the classical period is traced. It has been shown that scientific discourse in modern society has become open, hybrid, and global. New forms of discourse have emerged, such as expert conclusions, citizen opinions, commentary, and the presentation of controversial information. The role of the science journalist as an intermediary between science and the general public is changing. Communication between science and society is increasingly moving toward disintermediation, i.e., it occurs without intermediaries in the digital spaces of social networks, scientific blogs, and websites, where Internet users can directly ask scientists and experts questions and express their opinions. In the digital environment, text communication is often combined with multimedia visual content and hyperlinks, and also provides the possibility of immediate feedback in the form of comments or simplified evaluative signals of approval or disapproval. As a result, new hybrid discursive practices are emerging that integrate expression of opinion, writing, reading, and commenting, which previously functioned as relatively autonomous genres. Conclusions. The positive effects of these processes include the democratization of scientific knowledge dissemination, the promotion of interdisciplinary research, and the involvement of society in science. However, there are risks of relativizing truth, lowering scientific standards, a crisis in the institution of expertise, and, as a result, the threat of the spread of pseudoscientific knowledge.