Minerva 49 (3):295-316 (2011)
|Abstract||This paper uses Pierre Bourdieu’s field theory to develop tools for analyzing interdisciplinary scientific fields. Interdisciplinary fields are scientific spaces where no single form of scientific capital has a monopoly and therefore multiple forms of scientific capital constitute the structures and stakes of scientific competition. Scientists compete to accumulate and define forms of scientific capital and also to set the rates of exchange between them. The paper illustrates this framework by applying it to the interdisciplinary field of behavior genetics. Most behavior geneticists envision their participation in the field as a means to compete for scientific capital in other fields. However, the scientific capital of behavior genetics has different values for scientists attempting to deploy it in different neighboring fields. These values depend on situations in each field and the ways behavior genetics mediates relationships among them. The pattern of relationships of exchange helps explain the social hierarchy and several features of knowledge production within behavior genetics|
|Keywords||Bourdieu Field theory Scientific capital Interdisciplinary science Behavior genetics Knowledge production|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Caragh Brosnan (2011). The Significance of Scientific Capital in UK Medical Education. Minerva 49 (3):317-332.
Jennifer Marshall, The Development of Contemporary Medical Genetics Research Models and the Need for Scientific Responsibility.
Leah Ceccarelli (1995). A Rhetoric of Interdisciplinary Scientific Discourse: Textual Criticism of Dobzhansky's Genetics and the Origin of Species. Social Epistemology 9 (2):91 – 111.
Natália Oliva-Teles (2011). The Sense of Responsibility in the Context of Professional Activities in Medical Genetics. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 14 (4):397-405.
M. Ben-Chaim (2001). The Scientific Discovery of 'Natural Capital': The Production of Catalytic Antibodies. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 32 (3):413-433.
Wilfred Dolfsma, Rene van der Eijk & Albert Jolink (2009). On a Source of Social Capital: Gift Exchange. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 89 (3):315 - 329.
Bradford Verter (2003). Spiritual Capital: Theorizing Religion with Bourdieu Against Bourdieu. Sociological Theory 21 (2):150-174.
Mikael Rostila (2011). The Facets of Social Capital. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 41 (3):308-326.
Ulrich Herb, Open Access - a Panacea? Science, Society, Democracy, Digital Divide (Open Access - Ein Wundermittel? Wissenschaft, Gesellschaft, Demokratie, Digital Divide).
Stephen C. Maxson (1999). Some Misunderstandings and Misinterpretations About Sociobiology and Behavior Genetics in Lifelines by Steven Rose. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):898-899.
Ben Fine (1988). From Capital in Production to Capital in Exchange. Science and Society 52 (3):326 - 337.
Melanie Mitchell (2009). Complexity: A Guided Tour. Oxford University Press.
André H. J. Nijhof & Marius M. Rietdijk (1999). An ABC-Analysis of Ethical Organizational Behavior. Journal of Business Ethics 20 (1):39 - 50.
Keekok Lee (2003). Philosophy and Revolutions in Genetics: Deep Science and Deep Technology. Palgrave Macmillan.
Added to index2011-08-02
Total downloads10 ( #114,274 of 722,700 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,006 of 722,700 )
How can I increase my downloads?