Two conceptions of the sources of conservatism in scientific research

被引:7
作者
Bedessem, Baptiste [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ca Foscari, Dorsoduro 3246, I-30123 Venice, Italy
关键词
Scientific change; Conservatism; Practical turn; Pragmatism; Research policy;
D O I
10.1007/s11229-019-02479-0
中图分类号
N09 [自然科学史]; B [哲学、宗教];
学科分类号
01 ; 0101 ; 010108 ; 060207 ; 060305 ; 0712 ;
摘要
The issue of the conservatism of scientific research questions the nature and the role of the internal and external forces controlling the emergence of new research questions or problems, the exploration of risky directions of research, or the use of risky research methods. This issue has recently gained a new framing in connection with the growing importance of the peer-review process and of the social and economic pressures weighing on the funding of scientific research. Current literature then interrogates the external and internal features that promote what are described as conservative tendencies in scientific research. In this paper, I propose to contribute to this debate by clarifying what might be internal sources of conservatism in science; that is, that are inherent to the research process itself. I distinguish two possible understandings of the sources and manifestations of this internal conservatism. I first present a representational description of the nature and origin of conservatism in science, which brings to the fore the difficulties researchers find in setting aside their conceptual framework. I then offer for consideration a larger perspective on conservatism by arguing for the existence of a practical conservatism generated by all the dimensions of scientific activities. In this framework, conservatism in science can be explained by the tendency of all practices to close in on their own local objectives. I illustrate this view by reference to an historical episode: the discovery of the chemical nature of genes by Avery.
引用
收藏
页码:6597 / 6614
页数:18
相关论文
共 49 条
[21]   Action Research: Its Foundations in Open Systems Thinking and Relationship to the Scientific Method [J].
John Barton ;
John Stephens ;
Tim Haslett .
Systemic Practice and Action Research, 2009, 22 :475-488
[22]   Action Research: Its Foundations in Open Systems Thinking and Relationship to the Scientific Method [J].
Barton, John ;
Stephens, John ;
Haslett, Tim .
SYSTEMIC PRACTICE AND ACTION RESEARCH, 2009, 22 (06) :475-488
[23]   Scientific laws of research funding to support citations and diffusion of knowledge in life science [J].
Mosleh, Melika ;
Roshani, Saeed ;
Coccia, Mario .
SCIENTOMETRICS, 2022, 127 (04) :1931-1951
[24]   Discussing Arab Spring's effect on scientific productivity and research performance in Arab countries [J].
Turki, Houcemeddine ;
Ben Aouicha, Mohamed ;
Taieb, Mohamed Ali Hadj .
SCIENTOMETRICS, 2019, 120 (01) :337-339
[25]   Discussing Arab Spring’s effect on scientific productivity and research performance in Arab countries [J].
Houcemeddine Turki ;
Mohamed Ben Aouicha ;
Mohamed Ali Hadj Taieb .
Scientometrics, 2019, 120 :337-339
[26]   Making Quantitative Research Work: From Positivist Dogma to Actual Social Scientific Inquiry [J].
Zyphur, Michael J. ;
Pierides, Dean C. .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2020, 167 (01) :49-62
[27]   Making Quantitative Research Work: From Positivist Dogma to Actual Social Scientific Inquiry [J].
Michael J. Zyphur ;
Dean C. Pierides .
Journal of Business Ethics, 2020, 167 :49-62
[28]   The micro-dynamics of scientific choice: research project motivations among public affairs academics [J].
Nelson, John P. .
SCIENCE AND PUBLIC POLICY, 2024, 51 (01) :149-161
[29]   “Broader Impacts” or “Responsible Research and Innovation”? A Comparison of Two Criteria for Funding Research in Science and Engineering [J].
Michael Davis ;
Kelly Laas .
Science and Engineering Ethics, 2014, 20 :963-983
[30]   "Broader Impacts" or "Responsible Research and Innovation"? A Comparison of Two Criteria for Funding Research in Science and Engineering [J].
Davis, Michael ;
Laas, Kelly .
SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, 2014, 20 (04) :963-983