反对捍卫科学:对本土知识和科学提出更好的问题

IF 1.4 2区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Philosophy of Science Pub Date : 2023-10-23 DOI:10.1017/psa.2023.146
Emily C Parke, Daniel Hikuroa
{"title":"反对捍卫科学:对本土知识和科学提出更好的问题","authors":"Emily C Parke, Daniel Hikuroa","doi":"10.1017/psa.2023.146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper addresses problems with a defensive turn in discussions of science and Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing. Philosophers and practitioners of science have focused recent discussions on coarse-grained questions of demarcation, epistemic parity and identity—asking questions such as “Is Indigenous knowledge science?” Using representative examples from Aotearoa New Zealand, we expose rampant ambiguities in these arguments, and show that this combative framing can overlook what is actually at stake. We provide a framework for analyzing these problems and suggest better ways forward.","PeriodicalId":54620,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Science","volume":"1 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Against Defending Science: Asking Better Questions About Indigenous Knowledge and Science\",\"authors\":\"Emily C Parke, Daniel Hikuroa\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/psa.2023.146\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This paper addresses problems with a defensive turn in discussions of science and Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing. Philosophers and practitioners of science have focused recent discussions on coarse-grained questions of demarcation, epistemic parity and identity—asking questions such as “Is Indigenous knowledge science?” Using representative examples from Aotearoa New Zealand, we expose rampant ambiguities in these arguments, and show that this combative framing can overlook what is actually at stake. We provide a framework for analyzing these problems and suggest better ways forward.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54620,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy of Science\",\"volume\":\"1 2\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2023.146\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2023.146","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文在讨论科学和土著的认识、存在和行为方式时,以一种防御性的转向来解决问题。哲学家和科学实践者最近的讨论集中在划分、认知均等和同一性等粗粒度问题上,这些问题提出了“土著知识是科学吗?”通过新西兰奥特罗亚的代表性例子,我们揭露了这些论点中猖獗的模糊性,并表明这种好斗的框架可能会忽视真正的利害关系。我们提供了一个分析这些问题的框架,并提出了更好的前进方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Against Defending Science: Asking Better Questions About Indigenous Knowledge and Science
Abstract This paper addresses problems with a defensive turn in discussions of science and Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing. Philosophers and practitioners of science have focused recent discussions on coarse-grained questions of demarcation, epistemic parity and identity—asking questions such as “Is Indigenous knowledge science?” Using representative examples from Aotearoa New Zealand, we expose rampant ambiguities in these arguments, and show that this combative framing can overlook what is actually at stake. We provide a framework for analyzing these problems and suggest better ways forward.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Philosophy of Science
Philosophy of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
5.90%
发文量
128
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Since its inception in 1934, Philosophy of Science, along with its sponsoring society, the Philosophy of Science Association, has been dedicated to the furthering of studies and free discussion from diverse standpoints in the philosophy of science. The journal contains essays, discussion articles, and book reviews.
期刊最新文献
Biomimetic Epistemology Landscapes and Bandits: A Unified Model of Functional and Demographic Diversity On Cognitive Modeling and Other Minds An exploration of parameter duality in statistical inference A New Heuristic for Climate Adaptation
×
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