David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Minerva 47 (4):441-463 (2009)
Drawing from contemporary social science studies on the shifting regime of research governance, this paper extends the literature by utilizing a metaphoric image—research is a game—observed in a field engagement with 82 American, British, and Danish crop and plant scientists. It theorizes respondents’ thinking and practices by placing the rules of the research game in dynamic and interactive tension between the scientific, social, and political-economic contingencies that generate opportunities or setbacks. Scientists who play the game exploit opportunities and surmount setbacks by adopting strategies and reinventing tactics in order to maximize their winnings and to minimize their losses. Winners become superstars who decree what is open, closed, or doable science for the majority of the scientific community.
|Keywords||Typology of the game of research Game metaphor Metaphorical theorization Public university researchers Online and popular games|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
George Lakoff (1980). Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press.
Isabelle Bruno (2009). The “Indefinite Discipline” of Competitiveness Benchmarking as a Neoliberal Technology of Government. Minerva 47 (3):261-280.
Dominique Pestre (2003). Regimes of Knowledge Production in Society: Towards a More Political and Social Reading. [REVIEW] Minerva 41 (3):245-261.
Paolo Palladino (1990). The Political Economy of Applied Research: Plant Breeding in Great Britain, 1910–1940. [REVIEW] Minerva 28 (4):446-468.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
K. Brad Wray (2003). Is Science Really a Young Man's Game? Social Studies of Science 33:137-49.
Lisa J. Carlson & Raymond Dacey (2010). Social Norms and the Traditional Deterrence Game. Synthese 176 (1):105 - 123.
Edith T. Lammerts Van Bueren & Paul C. Struik (2005). Integrity and Rights of Plants: Ethical Notions in Organic Plant Breeding and Propagation. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (5):479-493.
M. Lafarge (1991). Reciprocal Conditioning Between the “Plant Stand” Level and the “Ndividual Whole Plant” Level During the Formation of the Ear Population of a Spring Cereal Crop. Acta Biotheoretica 39 (3-4):343-350.
Robert C. Robinson (2006). Bounded Epistemology. Ssrn Elibrary.
Jesús Zamora Bonilla (2005). Science as a Persuasion Game: An Inferentialist Approach. Episteme 2 (3):189-201.
Herman Cappelen (2011). Against Assertion. In Jessica Brown & Herman Cappelen (eds.), Assertion: New Philosophical Essays. Oxford University Press
Zamora Bonilla & P. Jesús (2006). Science Studies and the Theory of Games. Perspectives on Science 14 (4).
Francesco Guala (2006). Has Game Theory Been Refuted? Journal of Philosophy 103 (5):239-263.
J. A. Mangan (1975). Play Up and Play the Game: Victorian and Edwardian Public School Vocabularies of Motive. British Journal of Educational Studies 23 (3):324 - 335.
Added to index2010-12-11
Total downloads19 ( #203,013 of 1,911,489 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #252,705 of 1,911,489 )
How can I increase my downloads?