What Theoretical Ecology Reveals about Knowledge Transfer


Authors
Justin Donhauser
Bowling Green State University
Jamie Shaw
University of Toronto, St. George Campus
Abstract
Well-known epistemologies of science have implications for how best to understand knowledge transfer (KT). Yet, to date, no serious attempt has been made to explicate these particular implications. This paper infers views about KT from two popular epistemologies; what we characterize as incommensurabilitist views (after Devitt, 2001; Bird, 2002, 2008; Sankey and Hoyningen-Huene 2013) and voluntarist views (after Van Fraassen, 1984; Dupré, 2001; Chakravartty, 2015). We argue views of the former sort define the methodological, ontological, and social conditions under which research operates within ‘different worlds’ (to use Kuhn's expression), and entail that genuine KTs under those conditions should be difficult or even impossible. By contrast, more liberal voluntarist views recognize epistemological processes that allow for transfers across different sciences even under such conditions. After outlining these antithetical positions, we identify two kinds of KTs present in well-known episodes in the history of ecology—specifically, successful model transfers from chemical kinetics and thermodynamics into areas of ecological research—which reveal significant limitations of incommensurabilitist views. We conclude by discussing how the selected examples support a pluralistic voluntarism regarding KT.
Keywords Models  Knowledge Transfer  Philosophy of Ecology
Categories (categorize this paper)
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: 64,209
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Belvederes of Philosophy and Knowledge.Michael Fascia - 2018 - Journal of Business Philosophy 1 (1):1-7.
Wissens- und Wissenschaftstransfer – Einführende Bemerkungen†.Mitchell G. Ash - 2006 - Berichte Zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte 29 (3):181-189.
Discussions on Literature I ~ Epistemic Principals.Michael Fascia - 2014 - EMRI: Journal of Multicultural Research 1 (8):01-18.
Mechanisms of Knowledge Transfer.Timothy J. Nokes - 2009 - Thinking and Reasoning 15 (1):1 – 36.
Differentiating and Defusing Theoretical Ecology's Criticisms: A Rejoinder to Sagoff's Reply to Donhauser (2016).Justin Donhauser - 2017 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 63:70-79.
Theoretical Ecology as Etiological From the Start.Justin Donhauser - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 60:67-76.
Knowledge Transfer and the Complex Story of Scurvy.Sholom Glouberman - 2009 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 15 (3):553-557.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-03-05

Total views
0

Recent downloads (6 months)
0

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

My notes