Jacopo Ambrosj

• Doctoral defence: 25 October 2024, 1.30 p.m.
  
• Aula Emma Vorlat, Leercentrum Agora (KU Leuven) and online​
• Supervisors: Hugh Desmond (UAntwerpen) en Kris Dierickx (KUL)
• Co-supervisor: Luc Van Liedekerke (UAntwerpen)
• ​Register through this form

Abstract

The expectations of modern society on scientific research are multifaceted. On the one hand, we expect scientific research to pursue social good and to be beneficial to society. On the other, we want scientific research to offer objective knowledge that is not dependent on values or other idiosyncrasies. In this thesis, I explored the tensions due to these multifaceted expectations and how these expectations should guide the work of professional researchers. In particular, my guiding question was: should codes of conduct for research integrity embrace the idea that scientific research should be free from the influence of values or other interests?

I first identified the major reasons discussed by philosophers and other scholars for and against endorsing the so-called value-free ideal of science. These reasons can be used by policy-makers when preparing new guidelines for researchers. Second, I analyzed current codes of conduct for research integrity finding that they lack a clear position on the role that values can play in science and offer no guidance on how these values should be managed to avoid infringing on the integrity of research. Thirdly, I collected the opinions of researchers via in-depth interviews.

This study showed that the tension between being guided by societal values and being value-free is shared also within the research community. Based on these studies and further philosophical analysis I developed recommendations for future codes of conduct. In particular, codes of conduct for research integrity should be upfront about the role that values play in scientific research and they should guide them in the difficult evaluation that value-management requires.

Raf Wollaert

• Doctoral defence: 25 October 2024, 3 p.m.
  
• Nottebohmzaal Heritage Library Hendrik Conscience and online
• Supervisor: Steven Jacobs
• Register before 21 October: Raf.Wollaert@uantwerpen.be​

Abstract

“The Word Film?” Marcel Broodthaers and the Meaning of Cinema

What did cinema mean to Marcel Broodthaers? While the Belgian artist is internationally celebrated for his inventive use of various media—such as poetry, objects, and books—his films remained in the shadows for many years. On the centenary of his birth, this study sheds light on this often-overlooked aspect of Broodthaers’s work.

Much like his other works, Broodthaers’s films can be seen as intricate rebuses. Yet, they prompt us not only to consider their specific meanings but also to rethink the concept of cinema itself. What do we mean when we use the word ‘film’? Is our understanding of cinema confined to the film strip, the movie theater, or the omnipresent moving image? For Broodthaers, certainly not. In his work, the artist reveals that cinema can also be created through poetry, books, and spatial installations. His films engage in a dialogue with other media and vice versa, pushing the boundaries of what cinema can be. In doing so, Broodthaers challenges conventional notions of film. Rather than affirming our established view of the world, Broodthaers seeks to disrupt it, suggesting that an ‘other’ cinema might open the door to an “other world.”

As opposed to his contemporaries, Broodthaers did not project this “other world” onto the present or future but sought to uncover it from the past. Historical figures, antiquated objects, and seemingly obsolete ideas come to life in many of his films, sometimes quite literally: “In the realm of imagination, eras overlap.” Such time warps are a recurring theme in his films. For Broodthaers, cinema presented not only a “procedure” to connect diverse media but also to bridge different time periods.

Ultimately, the purpose of Broodthaers’s films was to destabilize entrenched ways of thinking. The cultural and ideological critique that they convey took root in the context of Belgian Surrealism and later aligned with neo-Marxist ideas. Just like the inherent recalcitrance of the artist’s work, his strategies to command its own ‘narrative’, the question raised by his films continues to resonate: can a reinvented cinema lead to emancipation, or is it destined to reinforce the status quo?