Suchergebnisse

Der Beitrag diskutiert gegenwärtige Forschung an der Schnittstelle von feministischer Technikforschung und Science & Technology Studies (STS) mit einem Fokus auf aktuelle Entwicklungen im Bereich der "Wissenschaften vom Künstlichen", wie z. B. der Robotik oder der Künstlichen Intelligenz. In diesen Feldern gewinnen Konzeptionen von Mensch- Maschine-Verbindungen und ihre soziomateriellen Grundlagen neue Brisanz; Grenzen zwischen Natur und Künstlichkeit werden neu verhandelt. Der Text diskutiert feministische Auseinandersetzungen mit Mensch-Maschine- Beziehungen, ihren materiellen und metaphorischen Grundlagen, aber auch in den Technowissenschaften dominante Vorannahmen und Politiken der Differenz. Er stellt die Frage, wie verantwortungsbewusste Wissensproduktion möglich ist sowie ein kritischer Austausch zwischen feministischen STS und gegenwärtigen Projekten der Technowissenschaften.

Complaints and resistance encountered by American scholars pursuing social science research abroad can be attributed to the following clusters of attitudes: (i) the fear complex, (2) political hostility, (3) cultural sensitivity, (4) the exploitation syndrome, and (5) the saturation factor.1 In this article I shall briefly analyze these different sources of resistance, then point to changes and variations in their incidence, and finally address the question of remedies.

According to the predominant image, applied science is a linear, sequential process, the application of science. First scientists or applied scientists develop knowledge that satisfies the epistemic criteria of science, and applied scientists then find ways to use this certified knowledge to solve society's problems. There is, therefore, a sharp distinction between epistemic or scientific criteria and social criteria. The historical development of the applied ecological discipline called range science or range management demonstrates instead that applied science is a simultaneous process. Range science developed at a time when America increasingly looked to science to solve social, political, and economic problems in the hope that science's ability to predict could provide the basis for organization and rational management. The institutionalization of range science industrialized ranching. Ranchers appealed to a variety of traditional American values in response to this industrialization, but in the new context surrounding ranching those values had become illegitimate. From the outset, range science acquired a dual orientation toward both the epistemic criteria of science and the social criteria of society. That dual orientation introduced a tension into range science because it was not obvious how range scientists should satisfy both sets of criteria simultaneously. Researchers in different institutional contexts developed distinct resolutions to that tension. The most significant difference between the institutions were their political objectives and a difference in the power relations between range researchers and their audiences. Those institutional contexts defined the social criteria and provided the background to judge the acceptability of particular resolutions of the tension, in the process providing the motivation and justification for range science. Nevertheless, range science was not just politics by another means because range scientists also satisfied the epistemic criteria of science. The distinction between epistemic and social criteria therefore did not exist in the historical development of range science because range scientists simultaneously satisfied the epistemic criteria of science and the social criteria that flowed from different political objectives and different power relations between researchers and ranchers. ; Ph. D.

Open Science is not just a rewarding endeavor for those involved in Language and Aging Research (LAR), but an important pursuit in its own right. The editorial presents two Open Science platforms and asks whether and how LAR topics are addressed. The transmission of academic knowledge to a wider public of practitioners, older adults and their environment could potentially improve the daily challenges of family life and care settings. Beyond this unidirectional transmission, the presence of a wider public and the awareness of channels to spread the knowledge can also inspire research and help to focus on relevant topics suitable for applications in real world scenarios.

In Canada, despite a low level of government support to scholar-initiated research in the social sciences, in recent years there has been an alarming relative decline in this support, while expenditures on government & contract research have increased rapidly. The consequences of this development are serious. In comparison with scholar-initiated research, in-house research is costly, is done by researchers who are not as well qualified as academics, & often the results are not revealed. Expenditures for research done by academics under contract appeal to the researchers' avarice rather than their concern for quality. They are also attracted to narrow projects controlled by government & away from fundamental questions of concern to society. Such research erodes the principles of independent research & academic freedom. To reverse this decline of free research in the social sciences, the federal government should freeze its expenditures on in-house research & should greatly increase its grants for scholar-initiated research. Also, the academic social science associations should adopt a code of ethics that enjoins their U members not to do narrow-gauged contract research for government departments. AA.

Discusses the spectacular rise of social science teaching in Brazil which started in the 1960s, all the more remarkable in view of the very limited place that it had occupied previously. Links the new interest in social sciences with politics. Social scientists need to take a critical look at democracy. Argues that if they are not capable of expanding the concept to include a Utopia of change, democracy will be no more than a disguised form of domination. (AM)

An interview with Richard Levins, a scientist who never accepted divisions between disciplines, nor between science and other human activities, such as politics, for example.

This volume is the definite statement on the current state of political science as a discipline in Western Europe. Detailfour chapters portray European developments. To know about the historical development, the organization of teaching and research, professional communication, and the chances of students of political science in the job market is of essential importance to political scientists, university administrators, and policy makers national, European, and global. This is particularly true after the Bologna Declaration when universities across Europe were asked to adopt (1) a system of easily readable and comparable degrees, (2) a system based on two cycles, (3) the establishment of a common system of credits, (4) to increase student and teacher mobility, (5) to assure quality standards, and (6) to improve the European dimension in teaching. The book informs on these general issues and reports country specific developments.

A proof-of-principle demonstration for extracting military-related technologies from a country's total technology publications has been performed, and applied to the Indian science and technology literature#. The method is general and can be applied to the extraction of any meta-category (e.g., intelligence-relevanttechnologies, infrastructure-relevant technologies, etc) which is not easily obtained from document clustering or factor analysis. The methodology for identifying relevant literature on military science appears to provide credible results. The volume of literature retrieved will vary depending on how strongly relevant is the desired literature. For the same definitions of 'military relevant', the volume of India's literature in the Ei Compendex database was an order of magnitude less than that of the USA or China.Defence Science Journal, 2010, 60(3), pp.259-270, DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.14429/dsj.60.352

The paper examines the conventionalism that arose within the framework of the second positivism in European philosophy at the turn of the XIX–XX centuries, in connection with Russian science and philosophy. Despite its being popular and developed mainly in Western philosophy, we demonstrate that its ideas were also reflected in Russian culture. Moreover, we argue that it was the achievements of Russian mathematicians that influenced the emergence of this direction in European philosophy. To determine the place of conventionalism in Russian culture, the works of such scientists, philosophers and historians of science as A. Poincaré, N.V. Efimov, G.V. Florovsky, P.S. Yushkevich and others were used. The article also provides an overview of their main works and ideas. The analysis also deals with the influence of ideological and political factors on the development of philosophy in the XX century in Russia and the USSR. It is shown that the achievements of Russian mathematicians had a significant influence on the emergence of conventionalism, and the ideas of conventionalism, in turn, were reflected in the concepts of Russian thinkers concerning the philosophy of science and the philosophy of history. Thus, N.I. Lobachevsky can be called a harbinger of mathematical conventionalism, some ideas of P.S. Yushkevich and A.A. Bogdanov can be referred to natural-scientific conventionalism, and some ideas of G.V. Florovsky can be called historical conventionalism. We conclude that Russian science, firstly, was one of the reasons for the emergence of conventionalism in Europe, and secondly, Russian philosophy adopted and applied some of its ideas, in particular, concerning the impossibility of complete knowledge of the world or the relativity of ways of expressing truth, which remain relevant today.