• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Studies in History and Philosophy of Science. A >The natural selection of conservative science
【24h】

The natural selection of conservative science

机译：保守科学的自然选择

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Social epistemologists have argued that high risk, high reward science has an important role to play in scientific communities. Recently, though, it has also been argued that various scientific fields seem to be trending towards conservatism the increasing production of what Kuhn (1962) might have called 'normal science'. This paper will explore a possible explanation for this sort of trend: that the process by which scientific research groups form, grow, and dissolve might be inherently hostile to such science. In particular, I employ a paradigm developed by Smaldino and McElreath (2016) that treats a scientific community as a population undergoing selection. As will become clear, perhaps counter-intuitively this sort of process in some ways promotes high risk, high reward science. But, as I will point out, risky science is, in general, the sort of thing that is hard to repeat. While more conservative scientists will be able to train students capable of continuing their successful projects, and so create thriving lineages, successful risky science may not be the sort of thing one can easily pass on. In such cases, the structure of scientific communities selects against high risk, high rewards projects. More generally, this project makes clear that there are at least two processes to consider in thinking about how incentives shape scientific communities the process by which individual scientists make choices about their careers and research, and the selective process governing the formation of new research groups.
机译：社会认识论者认为，高风险，高回报的科学在科学界中起着重要作用。但是，最近也有人争辩说，各种科学领域似乎都趋向于保守主义，而库恩（Kuhn，1962）可能将其称为“正常科学”。本文将探讨这种趋势的一种可能的解释：科研小组的形成，成长和消解的过程可能固有地与这种科学相抵触。特别是，我采用了Smaldino和McElreath（2016）开发的范例，该范例将科学界视为正在接受选择的人群。显而易见，这种过程可能在某种程度上违反了直觉，促进了高风险，高回报的科学。但是，正如我将指出的那样，风险科学通常是很难重复的事情。虽然更多的保守派科学家将能够训练有能力继续完成成功项目的学生，从而创造蓬勃发展的血统，但成功的冒险科学可能不是人们可以轻易通过的。在这种情况下，科学共同体的结构会选择高风险，高回报的项目。更广泛地说，该项目明确指出，在考虑激励因素如何塑造科学共同体的过程中，至少要考虑两个过程，即个体科学家对其职业和研究做出选择的过程，以及决定新研究小组形成的选择性过程。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号