Transition to Science 2.0: “Remoralizing” the Economy of Science

D. Tyfield
{"title":"Transition to Science 2.0: “Remoralizing” the Economy of Science","authors":"D. Tyfield","doi":"10.4245/SPONGE.V7I1.19664","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present is a moment of crisis and transition, both generally and specifically in “knowledge” and its institutions. Acknowledging this elicits the key questions: where are we? Where are we headed? What, if anything, can be done about this? And what can the “economics of science” contribute to this? This paper assumes a “cultural political economy of research & innovation” (CPERI) perspective to explore the current upheaval and transition in the system of academic knowledge production, at the confluence of accelerating commercialisation and the seemingly opposing movement of “open science.” This perspective affords a characterisation of the core of the current crises as a crisis of moral economy; an issue to which a political economy of epistemic authority is in turn crucial. A “remoralizing” of knowledge production is thus a matter of key systemic importance, though it is important to understand such developments in power-strategic, and not explicitly moral, terms. Much of the current moves towards “open science” and “massively open online courses” (MOOCs) can also then be seen as self-defeating developments that simply exacerbate the crisis of a viable “economy of science” and in no sense its solution. Their lasting significance, however, is more likely to lie precisely in their effects on the construction of a new moral economy of knowledge production.","PeriodicalId":29732,"journal":{"name":"Spontaneous Generations-Journal for the History and Philosophy of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2013-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spontaneous Generations-Journal for the History and Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4245/SPONGE.V7I1.19664","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

The present is a moment of crisis and transition, both generally and specifically in “knowledge” and its institutions. Acknowledging this elicits the key questions: where are we? Where are we headed? What, if anything, can be done about this? And what can the “economics of science” contribute to this? This paper assumes a “cultural political economy of research & innovation” (CPERI) perspective to explore the current upheaval and transition in the system of academic knowledge production, at the confluence of accelerating commercialisation and the seemingly opposing movement of “open science.” This perspective affords a characterisation of the core of the current crises as a crisis of moral economy; an issue to which a political economy of epistemic authority is in turn crucial. A “remoralizing” of knowledge production is thus a matter of key systemic importance, though it is important to understand such developments in power-strategic, and not explicitly moral, terms. Much of the current moves towards “open science” and “massively open online courses” (MOOCs) can also then be seen as self-defeating developments that simply exacerbate the crisis of a viable “economy of science” and in no sense its solution. Their lasting significance, however, is more likely to lie precisely in their effects on the construction of a new moral economy of knowledge production.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
向科学2.0的过渡:科学经济的“再化”
当前是一个危机和过渡的时刻,无论是在“知识”及其制度方面,还是在一般情况下。承认这一点引出了一个关键问题:我们在哪里?我们要去哪里?对此,我们能做些什么呢?“科学经济学”能对此做出什么贡献呢?本文以“研究与创新的文化政治经济学”(CPERI)的视角,探讨在加速商业化和看似对立的“开放科学”运动的交汇下,当前学术知识生产体系的剧变和转型。这一观点将当前危机的核心特征描述为道德经济危机;对于这个问题,认识论权威的政治经济学是至关重要的。因此,知识生产的“再货币化”是一个关键的系统重要性问题,尽管从权力-战略而非明确的道德角度理解这种发展很重要。目前许多“开放科学”和“大规模开放在线课程”(MOOCs)的举措也可以被视为弄巧成拙的发展,它们只会加剧可行的“科学经济”危机,而不会在任何意义上解决它。然而,它们的持久意义更可能恰恰在于它们对构建一种新的知识生产道德经济的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Beyond Realism and Antirealism ---At Last? Tolstoy’s argument: realism and the history of science Douglas A. Vakoch and Matthew F. Dowd. The Drake Equation: Estimating the Prevalence of Extraterrestrial Life through the Ages The Relevance of Evidence from the History of Science in the Contemporary Realism/Anti-realism Debate Four Challenges to Epistemic Scientific Realism—and the Socratic Alternative.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1