8 found
Order:
See also
  1. Epistemic Dependence in Interdisciplinary Groups.Hanne Andersen & Susann Wagenknecht - 2013 - Synthese 190 (11):1881-1898.
    In interdisciplinary research scientists have to share and integrate knowledge between people and across disciplinary boundaries. An important issue for philosophy of science is to understand how scientists who work in these kinds of environments exchange knowledge and develop new concepts and theories across diverging fields. There is a substantial literature within social epistemology that discusses the social aspects of scientific knowledge, but so far few attempts have been made to apply these resources to the analysis of interdisciplinary science. Further, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   28 citations  
  2.  29
    Empirical Philosophy of Science: Introducing Qualitative Methods Into Philosophy of Science.Hanne Andersen, Nancy Nersessian & Susann Wagenknecht (eds.) - 2015 - Springer International Publishing.
    The book examines the emerging approach of using qualitative methods, such as interviews and field observations, in the philosophy of science. Qualitative methods are gaining popularity among philosophers of science as more and more scholars are resorting to empirical work in their study of scientific practices. At the same time, the results produced through empirical work are quite different from those gained through the kind of introspective conceptual analysis more typical of philosophy. This volume explores the benefits and challenges of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  3.  88
    Facing the Incompleteness of Epistemic Trust: Managing Dependence in Scientific Practice.Susann Wagenknecht - 2015 - Social Epistemology 29 (2):160-184.
    Based on an empirical study of a research team in natural science, the author argues that collaborating scientists do not trust each other completely. Due to the inherent incompleteness of trust, epistemic trust among scientists is not sufficient to manage epistemic dependency in research teams. To mitigate the limitations of epistemic trust, scientists resort to specific strategies of indirect assessment such as dialoguing practices and the probing of explanatory responsiveness. Furthermore, they rely upon impersonal trust and deploy practices of hierarchical (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  4.  31
    Opaque and Translucent Epistemic Dependence in Collaborative Scientific Practice.Susann Wagenknecht - 2014 - Episteme 11 (4):475-492.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  5. Collaboration in Scientific Practice—-A Social Epistemology of Research Groups.Susann Wagenknecht - 2014 - Dissertation, Aarhus University
    This monograph investigates the collaborative creation of scientific knowledge in research groups. To do so, I combine philosophical analysis with a first-hand comparative case study of two research groups in experimental science. Qualitative data are gained through observation and interviews, and I combine empirical insights with existing approaches to knowledge creation in philosophy of science and social epistemology. -/- On the basis of my empirically-grounded analysis I make several conceptual contributions. I study scientific collaboration as the interaction of scientists within (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6. Four Asymmetries Between Moral and Epistemic Trustworthiness.Susann Wagenknecht - 2014 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 3 (6):82-86.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  7.  8
    Debating Troy in the Mass Media – The Catalytic Impact of Public Controversy on Academic Discourse.Susann Wagenknecht - 2012 - In Simone Roedder Martina FranzenPeter Weingart & Peter Weingart (eds.), The Sciences’ Media Connection – Public Communication and its Repercussions. Springer. pp. 291-306.
    he Troy controversy (2001–2005) illustrates the substantial impact of mass media on academic discourse among specialists. Triggered by a disputed exhibition, the controversy breaks out in the mass media and quickly escalates. In leading newspapers, Germany’s most renowned archeologists discuss findings and their interpretation in Troy research fiercely. The public Troy controversy is best characterized as an inter-specialist debate since lay people virtually have no say. The chapter provides an overview of the course that the public and the subsequent academic (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. Feeling with the Organism: A Blueprint for an Empirical Philosophy of Science.Susann Wagenknecht & Erika Mansnerus - 2015 - In Hanne Andersen, Nancy J. Nersessian & Susann Wagenknecht (eds.), Empirical Philosophy of Science. Springer Verlag.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation