Cross-disciplinary research as a platform for philosophical research


Authors
Chad Gonnerman
University of Southern Indiana
Stephen Crowley
Boise State University
Abstract
It is argued that core areas of philosophy can benefit from reflection on cross-disciplinary research (CDR). We start by giving a brief account of CDR, describing its variability and some of the ways in which philosophers can interact with it. We then provide an argument in principle for the conclusion that CDR is philosophically fecund, arguing that since CDR highlights fundamental differences among disciplinary research worldviews, it can be used to motivate new philosophical problems and supply new insights into old problems. We close by providing an argument by example that uses the epistemology of peer disagreement to establish the potential of CDR for core philosophical areas. With this argument, we aim to demonstrate how the complex research contexts that CDR affords can point the way toward important avenues of epistemological research by highlighting potential limitations of key epistemological components, such as peerage and uniqueness.
Keywords cross-disciplinary research, research worldviews, disagreement, idealization, epistemic peers, uniqueness
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/apa.2016.16
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 47,149
External links

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

Epistemology of Disagreement: The Good News.David Christensen - 2007 - Philosophical Review 116 (2):187-217.
Epistemological Puzzles About Disagreement.Richard Feldman - 2006 - In Stephen Hetherington (ed.), Epistemology Futures. Oxford University Press. pp. 216-236.
The Uniqueness Thesis.Matthew Kopec & Michael G. Titelbaum - 2016 - Philosophy Compass 11 (4):189-200.
Epistemology.Richard Feldman - 2003 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 68 (2):429-429.

View all 20 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

On the Nature of Cross-Disciplinary Integration: A Philosophical Framework.Michael O'Rourke, Stephen Crowley & Chad Gonnerman - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 56:62-70.
The Challenges of Cross-Disciplinary Research.Jens Aagaard-Hansen - 2007 - Social Epistemology 21 (4):425 – 438.
Issues of Academic Disciplines in Agricultural Research.H. O. Kunkel - 1988 - Agriculture and Human Values 5 (4):16-25.
Disciplinary Capture and Epistemological Obstacles to Interdisciplinary Research: Lessons From Central African Conservation Disputes.Evelyn Brister - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 56:82-91.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-10-15

Total views
5 ( #1,074,160 of 2,289,332 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #238,403 of 2,289,332 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature