Archival science facing the information society

It is only a few decades ago that archivists befan to redefine theirdiscipline in terms of a science. This redefinition of archives and records management was the consequence of a growing need for an adequate expression referring to a comprehensive new body of knowledge on records and archives. Consensus on how to adequately define archival sciencehas not been achieved yet, however. As information society evolves,records and archives are changing in nature and status. It is anemerging discipline that has to be defined, which is still bearsthe impress of the mindset and practices of the industrial society.Bruno Delmas shows the archivist some clues to find a way out of thisambiguity and keep communicating human heritage to unknown generations.     

Archival science facing the information society

It is only a few decades ago that archivists befan to redefine their discipline in terms of a science. This redefinition of archives and records management was the consequence of a growing need for an adequate expression referring to a comprehensive new body of knowledge on records and archives. Consensus on how to adequately define archival science has not been achieved yet, however. As information society evolves, records and archives are changing in nature and status. It is an emerging discipline that has to be defined, which is still bears the impress of the mindset and practices of the industrial society. Bruno Delmas shows the archivist some clues to find a way out of this ambiguity and keep communicating human heritage to unknown generations.     

Archival science and changes in the paradigm

The dominant paradigm in Archival Science, thehistorical-technicist paradigm, has its origins with the French Revolution and raised from the social, economic, political, ideological and cultural changes that occur during the 19th and 20th centuries. During this last one and due specially to the technological revolution Archival Science reinforced its technical component and became autonomous in face of History, but the consolidation of the model, based on a custodial, technicist and documentalist perspective, is associated to a knowledge essentially empirical. By effect of the new conditions generated by Information Society, the dominant paradigm entered into a crisis and developed inside itself the factors which, unavoidably, will produce the paradigm shift. The new paradigm — thescientific-informational paradigm — conceives Archival Science as an applied discipline into the scope of Information Science and defines unequivocally its object of study — the archive, understood as aninformation system — and its scientific method of research. The method tends to find consolidation through quadripolar research dynamics, which is operated and continuously repeated within the field of knowledge itself, which implies a permanent interaction on four poles — epistemological, theoretical, technical and morphological.     

Archival science and changes in the paradigm

The dominant paradigm in Archival Science, thehistorical-technicist paradigm, has its origins with the French Revolution and raised from the social, economic, political, ideological and cultural changes that occur during the 19th and 20th centuries. During this last one and due specially to the technological revolution Archival Science reinforced its technical component and became autonomous in face of History, but the consolidation of the model, based on a custodial, technicist and documentalist perspective, is associated to a knowledge essentially empirical. By effect of the new conditions generated by Information Society, the dominant paradigm entered into a crisis and developed inside itself the factors which, unavoidably, will produce the paradigm shift. The new paradigm — thescientific-informational paradigm — conceives Archival Science as an applied discipline into the scope of Information Science and defines unequivocally its object of study — the archive, understood as aninformation system — and its scientific method of research. The method tends to find consolidation through quadripolar research dynamics, which is operated and continuously repeated within the field of knowledge itself, which implies a permanent interaction on four poles — epistemological, theoretical, technical and morphological.     

The impact of digital technology on archival science

Archival science is to be regarded as a system. The properties of that system can be investigated and integrated. The methodology to do so has been tested in two research projects which are presented in this article as examples of the way in which the view of archival science as a system supports the development of new knowledge and as a demonstration of the stability of archival theory. This article presupposes that the archival discipline is also a “science”. Many have argued against the idea on the basis of a common perception that a science is a type of study entirely objective by virtue of the rigorous manner in which it is carried out and the restricted range of topics to which it applies. In fact, the activity of science is based upon a complex framework of assumptions that make it possible for the landscape of the scientific endeavour to be redrawn over time, and, while striving towards objectivity, considers it to be an unattainable ideal.     

The impact of digital technology on archival science

Archival science is to be regarded as a system. The properties of that system can be investigated and integrated. The methodology to do so has been tested in two research projects which are presented in this article as examples of the way in which the view of archival science as a system supports the development of new knowledge and as a demonstration of the stability of archival theory. This article presupposes that the archival discipline is also a “science”. Many have argued against the idea on the basis of a common perception that a science is a type of study entirely objective by virtue of the rigorous manner in which it is carried out and the restricted range of topics to which it applies. In fact, the activity of science is based upon a complex framework of assumptions that make it possible for the landscape of the scientific endeavour to be redrawn over time, and, while striving towards objectivity, considers it to be an unattainable ideal.     

后现代档案学理论的思想实质研究

作为档案学演进的一股重要潮流,后现代档案学已成为继古典档案学与现代档案学之后的又一创新性理论样态。探析后现代档案学理论的思想实质是理解与深化这一理论样态的重要基础。后现代档案学理论的思想实质体现在其理论批判性、思维更新性和多元主张性。其中,理论批判是后现代档案学理论的基本立足点,区别于传统档案学理论的僵化模式;思维更新是后现代档案学理论的发展活力源泉,区别于传统档案学理论的固有认知;多元主张是后现代档案学理论的认识论与方法论基础,区别于传统档案学理论的确定性倡导。     

Archival science and postmodernism: new formulations for old concepts

Process rather than product, becoming rather than being, dynamicrather than static, context rather than text, reflecting time andplace rather than universal absolutes – these have become thepostmodern watchwords for analyzing and understanding science,society, organizations, and business activity, among others. Theyshould likewise become the watchwords for archival science in thenew century, and thus the foundation for a new conceptual paradigmfor the profession. Postmodernism is not the only reason for reformulatingthe main precepts of archival science. Significant changes in thepurpose of archives as institutions and the nature of records areother factors which, combined with postmodern insights, form thebasis of the new perception of archives as documents, institutions,and profession in society.This essay explores the nature of postmodernism and archival science,and suggest links between the two. It outlines two broad changes inarchival thinking that underpin the archival paradigm shift, beforesuggesting new formulations for most traditional archival concepts.     

Archival science and postmodernism: new formulations for old concepts

Process rather than product, becoming rather than being, dynamic rather than static, context rather than text, reflecting time and place rather than universal absolutes—these have become the postmodern watchwords for analyzing and understanding science, society, organizations, and business activity, among others. They should likewise become the watchwords for archival science in the new century, and thus the foundation for a new conceptual paradigm for the profession. Postmodernism is not the only reason for reformulating the main precepts of archival science. Significant changes in the purpose of archives as institutions and the nature of records are other factors which, combined with postmodern insights, form the basis of the new perception of archives as documents, institutions, and profession in society. This essay explores the nature of postmodernism and archival science, and suggest links between the two. It outlines two broad changes in archival thinking that underpin the archival paradigm shift, before suggesting new formulations for most traditional archival concepts.