Abstract
The question of the division of cognitive labor has given rise to various models characterizing the way scientists should distribute their efforts. These models often consider the scientific community as a self-governed sphere constituted by rational agents making choices on the basis of fixed rules. Such models have recently been criticized for not taking into account the real mechanisms of science funding. Hence, the question of the utility of the DCL models in guiding science policy remains an open one. In this paper, we show that two unconsidered dimensions would have to be taken into account. First, DCL studies miss the existence of distinct levels of epistemic objectives organizing the research process. Indeed, the scientific field is structured as a system of hierarchical, interconnected practices which are defined both by their inherent purposes and by various superposed external functions. Second, I criticize the absence of ontological considerations, since the epistemological significance of pluralism is highly dependent on the nature of the object under study. Because of these missing dimensions, current DCL models might have a limited usefulness to identify good practices of research governance.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2018, 2019
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s13194-018-0230-8
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 52,919
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Science, Truth, and Democracy.Philip Kitcher - 2001 - Oxford University Press.
Science, Truth, and Democracy.A. Bird - 2003 - Mind 112 (448):746-749.

View all 39 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Some Remarks on the Division of Cognitive Labor.Marco Viola - 2015 - RT. A Journal on Research Policy and Evaluation 3.
Diversity and the Division of Cognitive Labor.Ryan Muldoon - 2013 - Philosophy Compass 8 (2):117-125.
The Epistemic Norms of Intra-Scientific Testimony.Mikkel Gerken - 2015 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 45 (6):568-595.
A Unified Model of the Division of Cognitive Labor.Rogier De Langhe - 2014 - Philosophy of Science 81 (3):444-459.
The Epistemic Division of Labor Revisited.Johanna Thoma - 2015 - Philosophy of Science 82 (3):454-472.
Linguistic Labor and its Division.Jeff Engelhardt - 2019 - Philosophical Studies 176 (7):1855-1871.
Self Organization and Adaptation in Insect Societies.Robert E. Page & Sandra D. Mitchell - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:289 - 298.
A Roadmap for Integrating the Brain with Mind Maps.Andreas Demetriou & Antigoni Mouyi - 2007 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (2):156-158.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-08-27

Total views
20 ( #491,408 of 2,343,533 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #514,299 of 2,343,533 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes