Proof (2021)

 set themselves the goal of defining objects and applying adequate and predictive descriptive models to them. It is not certain, however, that all facts can be defined, observed and predicted in the same way. How are hypotheses corroborated in different fields of knowledge? What is reliability? When is it time to change the way we think? What are the differences between qualitative and quantitative approaches? This series of lectures will explore the question of evidence (or the lack of it) from the perspective of several disciplines.A series of public lectures organised as part of the teaching'"La recherche dans tous ses états"

• Wednesdays from 3 November to 1 December 2021 from 5:15pm to 6:45pm
• Amphimax building, room 412 and live webcast online on UNIL live Web Streaming https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMRwzZJguCyzvveznZBrFgQ
• Please note: Presentation of a covid certificate and identity document is compulsory for access to the conference room. Those unable to attend in person may follow the conference online, which will be broadcast live so that it can be accessed by anyone interested.

Organisation and registration: Delphine Preissmann (FBM, Sciences au Carré, delphine.preissmann@unil.ch)

Alain Papaux, Faculty of Law, Criminal Sciences and Public Administration

Beyond reasonable doubt: the law versus scientific evidence?

« L’intime conviction » says the Court. « Beyond reasonable doubt » translates the’épistémologue. A matter for lawyers? When the examination of a chemical substance before it is placed on the market fails to establish that it is dangerous, can it be declared harmless? Ah, no  says the logician  the non-proof of A ¹ the proof of non-A. Will the authorisation be delivered ? The scientist and the lawyer reply that the Beyond reasonable doubt » is a presumption of innocence. The facts themselves are constructed on the basis of clues, let alone evidence. And clues always require interpretation, not simple deduction. Sherlock Holmes, a liar?

Danielle Chaperon (French section) et Raphaël Baroni (French as a foreign language school), Faculty of Arts

What is a robust model in literary theory?

The narrative perspective is a complex phénomène that hasébeen théorisedé in various ways since the late nineteenth^e siècle, up to the’à the’Gérard Genette's establishment, in 1972, of a modèle that has become standard and known in the field of narratology under the name of « triple focalisation ». This model, partly because of its « élégance », rapidly influenced teaching practices and, over the last fifty years, it continues to’êuit;e strongly mobilisedé for the interpretation of literary texts, not without posing someèmes problems, to which we shall return.

The inherent limitations of the Genettian conception of focus were first highlighted by the development of the Genettian theory of focus;volution de la théorie du récit dans le cadre’une narratologie filmique développe;e par François Jost (un doctorant de Genette). The stylistic approach has also highlighted the difficulties associated with the textual construction of point of view, which only imperfectly overlaps with the theory of triple focalisation. Finally, two trends emerge from the use of focalization in schools, which can be observed in teachers' discourse and in textbooks: the first is that of a gradual shift towards a conception of internal focalisation as an analysis of the subjectivity of the characters; the second is that of inherent difficulties; certain imprecisions of the modèle and à terminology employed by Genette, particularly with regard to the distinction between external focus and zéro focus.

To sum up, the conference will seek to show that intermedia comparison and the stylistic extension of narrative theory, as well as the study of its applications in schools, are ways of testing the robustness of narratological concepts and improving their usability.

Frédéric Schütz, Integrative Genomics Centre, Faculty of Biology and Medicine

Statistics, a science that doesn't need proving