在学术界(更)诚信,鼓励长期的知识创造和学术自由

Kleio Akrivou
{"title":"在学术界(更)诚信,鼓励长期的知识创造和学术自由","authors":"Kleio Akrivou","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"European researchers across heterogeneous disciplines voice concerns and argue for new paths towards a brighter future regarding scientific and knowledge creation and communi- cation. Recently, in biological and natural sciences concerns have been expressed that major threats are intentionally ignored. These threats are challenging Europe's future sustainability towards creating knowledge that effectively deals with emerging social, environmental, health, and economic problems of a planetary scope. Within social science circles, however, the root cause regarding the above challenges has been linked with macro-level forces of neo-liberal ways of valuing and relevant rules in academia and beyond which we take for granted. These concerns raised by heterogeneous scholars in natural and the applied social sciences concern the ethics of today's research and academic integrity. Applying Bourdieu's sociology, there is little hope that intentional human agency may change the current habitus. Rather than attributing the replication of neo-liberal habitus in intentional agent and institutional choices, Bourdieu's work raises the importance of thoughtlessly internalised habits in human and social action. Accordingly, most action within a given paradigm (in this case, neo-liberalism) is understood as habituated, i.e. unconsciously reproducing external social fields, even ill-defined ways of valuing. This essay analyses these and how they may help critically analyse the current habitus surrounding research and knowledge production, evaluation, and communication and related aspects of academic free- dom. Although it is acknowledged that transformation is not easy, this essay presents arguments and recent theory paths to suggest that change nevertheless may be a realistic hope once certain action logics are encouraged.","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":"15 1","pages":"49-54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Towards (more) integrity in academia, encouraging long-term knowledge creation and academic freedom\",\"authors\":\"Kleio Akrivou\",\"doi\":\"10.3354/ESEP00156\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"European researchers across heterogeneous disciplines voice concerns and argue for new paths towards a brighter future regarding scientific and knowledge creation and communi- cation. Recently, in biological and natural sciences concerns have been expressed that major threats are intentionally ignored. These threats are challenging Europe's future sustainability towards creating knowledge that effectively deals with emerging social, environmental, health, and economic problems of a planetary scope. Within social science circles, however, the root cause regarding the above challenges has been linked with macro-level forces of neo-liberal ways of valuing and relevant rules in academia and beyond which we take for granted. These concerns raised by heterogeneous scholars in natural and the applied social sciences concern the ethics of today's research and academic integrity. Applying Bourdieu's sociology, there is little hope that intentional human agency may change the current habitus. Rather than attributing the replication of neo-liberal habitus in intentional agent and institutional choices, Bourdieu's work raises the importance of thoughtlessly internalised habits in human and social action. Accordingly, most action within a given paradigm (in this case, neo-liberalism) is understood as habituated, i.e. unconsciously reproducing external social fields, even ill-defined ways of valuing. This essay analyses these and how they may help critically analyse the current habitus surrounding research and knowledge production, evaluation, and communication and related aspects of academic free- dom. Although it is acknowledged that transformation is not easy, this essay presents arguments and recent theory paths to suggest that change nevertheless may be a realistic hope once certain action logics are encouraged.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40001,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"49-54\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-03-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00156\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00156","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

跨异质学科的欧洲研究人员表达了他们的关注,并为通往科学和知识创造和交流的更光明未来的新途径而争论。最近,在生物和自然科学领域,人们对故意忽视重大威胁表示担忧。这些威胁正在挑战欧洲未来在创造知识方面的可持续性,从而有效地处理全球范围内新出现的社会、环境、卫生和经济问题。然而,在社会科学圈内,上述挑战的根本原因与宏观层面的新自由主义评估方式和学术界的相关规则有关,我们认为这是理所当然的。这些由自然科学和应用社会科学领域的异质学者提出的担忧涉及到当今研究的伦理和学术诚信。运用布迪厄的社会学理论,有意的人类能动性可能改变当前的习性的希望微乎其微。布迪厄的作品并没有将新自由主义习惯的复制归因于有意的代理人和制度选择,而是提出了人类和社会行动中不经思考的内化习惯的重要性。因此,在给定范式(在这种情况下,新自由主义)下的大多数行动被理解为习惯性的,即无意识地复制外部社会领域,甚至是不明确的价值方式。本文分析了这些,以及它们如何有助于批判性地分析围绕研究和知识生产、评估、交流以及学术自由相关方面的当前习惯。虽然人们承认转型并不容易,但本文提出的论点和最新的理论路径表明,一旦鼓励某些行动逻辑,变革可能是一个现实的希望。
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
Towards (more) integrity in academia, encouraging long-term knowledge creation and academic freedom
European researchers across heterogeneous disciplines voice concerns and argue for new paths towards a brighter future regarding scientific and knowledge creation and communi- cation. Recently, in biological and natural sciences concerns have been expressed that major threats are intentionally ignored. These threats are challenging Europe's future sustainability towards creating knowledge that effectively deals with emerging social, environmental, health, and economic problems of a planetary scope. Within social science circles, however, the root cause regarding the above challenges has been linked with macro-level forces of neo-liberal ways of valuing and relevant rules in academia and beyond which we take for granted. These concerns raised by heterogeneous scholars in natural and the applied social sciences concern the ethics of today's research and academic integrity. Applying Bourdieu's sociology, there is little hope that intentional human agency may change the current habitus. Rather than attributing the replication of neo-liberal habitus in intentional agent and institutional choices, Bourdieu's work raises the importance of thoughtlessly internalised habits in human and social action. Accordingly, most action within a given paradigm (in this case, neo-liberalism) is understood as habituated, i.e. unconsciously reproducing external social fields, even ill-defined ways of valuing. This essay analyses these and how they may help critically analyse the current habitus surrounding research and knowledge production, evaluation, and communication and related aspects of academic free- dom. Although it is acknowledged that transformation is not easy, this essay presents arguments and recent theory paths to suggest that change nevertheless may be a realistic hope once certain action logics are encouraged.
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
Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics
Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
期刊介绍: •provides a global stage for presenting, discussing and developing issues concerning ethics in science, environmental politics, and ecological and economic ethics •publishes accepted manuscripts rapidly •guarantees immediate world-wide visibility •is edited and produced by an experienced team
期刊最新文献
Justifying the Precautionary Principle as a political principle The Humanised Zoo: Decolonizing conservation education through a new narrative Ecotheology: environmental ethical view in water spring protection The role of 'Thoughtful Intelligence' in climate statesmanship Cognitive artifacts and human enhancement
×
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