Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSchmidt, Jan Corneliusen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-03-17T18:57:47Z
dc.date.available2010-03-17T18:57:47Z
dc.date.issued2009-10en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1853/32400
dc.descriptionAtlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy 2009en_US
dc.descriptionThis presentation was part of the session : Other Papersen_US
dc.descriptionThis material is presented to ensure timely dissemination of scholarly and technical work. Copyright and all rights therein are retained by authors or by other copyright holders. All persons copying this information are expected to adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each author's copyright. In most cases, these works may not be reposted without the explicit permission of the copyright holder. ©2009 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. However, permission to reprint/republish this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or to reuse any copyrighted component of this work in other works must be obtained from the IEEE.
dc.description.abstractIn late-modern societies, knowledge constitutes a major component of any human activity. Knowledge politics - a field of political activities concerned with the production, application, monitoring and control of new knowledge and knowledge-based technoscientific innovations - has gained importance over the last 30 years. A central term in recent knowledge politics is "interdisciplinarity". The vagueness of this term, however, appears to be a disadvantage for any public discourse on goals and objectives of any specific knowledge politics. In addition to what has been achieved in the field of reflection on interdisciplinarity (ID), the aim of this paper is to provide a philosophical foundation for a classification and criticism of the innumerable usages of interdisciplinarity in present knowledge politics. With regard to established positions in the philosophy of science, different types of ID can be distinguished: the object type ("ontology"), the theory type (epistemology), the method type (methodology), and the problem / purpose type. Based on this classification I will show which specific type of ID is involved in the NSF's scenario on converging technologies - one of the most prominent kinds of knowledge politics. This type of interdisciplinarity will be contrasted with the research program of the European Commission on converging technologies.en_US
dc.publisherGeorgia Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesACSIP09. Other Papersen_US
dc.subjectKnowledge politics
dc.subjectInterdisciplinarity
dc.subjectConverging technologies
dc.titleKnowledge Politics of Nano-Interdisciplinarity: Towards a Critical Knowledge Assessmenten_US
dc.typeProceedingsen_US
dc.contributor.corporatenameTechnische Universität Darmstadten_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record