首页> 外文期刊>Economy and Society >Logics of interdisciplinarity
【24h】

Logics of interdisciplinarity

机译:跨学科逻辑

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This paper interrogates influential contemporary accounts of interdisciplinarity, in which it is portrayed as offering new ways of rendering science accountable to society and/or of forging closer relations between scientific research and innovation. The basis of the paper is an eighteen-month empirical study of three interdisciplinary fields that cross the boundaries between the natural sciences or engineering, on the one hand, and the social sciences or arts, on the other. The fields are: 1) environmental and climate change research, 2) ethnography in the IT industry and 3) art-science. In the first part of the paper, in contrast to existing accounts, we question the idea that interdisciplinarity should be understood in terms of the synthesis of two or more disciplines. We stress the forms of agonism and antagonism that often characterize relations between disciplinary and interdisciplinary research, and distinguish between three modes of interdisciplinarity. In the second part we outline three distinctive logics or rationales that guide interdisciplinary research. In addition to the logics of accountability and innovation, we identify the logic of ontology, that is, an orientation apparent in diverse interdisciplinary practices in each of our three fields towards effecting ontological transformation in the objects and relations of research. While the three logics are interdependent, they are not reducible to each other and are differently entangled in each of the fields. We point to the potential for invention in such interdisciplinary practices and, against the equation of disciplinary research with autonomy, to the possibility of forms of interdisciplinary autonomy.
机译:这篇论文审问了当代有影响力的跨学科性研究,该研究被描绘为提供了使科学对社会负责和/或建立科学研究与创新之间更紧密关系的新方法。本文的基础是对三个跨学科领域的为期18个月的实证研究,这些领域一方面跨越了自然科学或工程学,另一方面跨越了社会科学或艺术学的界限。领域包括:1)环境与气候变化研究,2)IT行业中的民族志学和3)艺术科学。在本文的第一部分中,与现有的描述相反,我们质疑应该根据两个或更多学科的综合来理解跨学科性的观点。我们强调通常表现为学科研究和学科研究之间关系的激动和对抗形式,并区分学科间的三种模式。在第二部分中,我们概述了指导跨学科研究的三种独特的逻辑或原理。除了问责制和创新的逻辑外,我们还确定了本体论的逻辑,即,在我们三个领域的每一个领域的不同跨学科实践中,很明显的方向是实现研究对象和关系的本体论转变。虽然这三种逻辑是相互依存的,但它们彼此不可简化,并且在每个领域中都有不同的纠缠。我们指出了在这种跨学科实践中发明的潜力,并与具有自主性的学科研究方程式相反,指出了跨学科自主形式的可能性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号