Tracing interdisciplinarity of converging technologies at the nanoscale: A critical analysis of recent nanotechnosciences

Besides ‘innovation’, ‘interdisciplinarity’ is one of the most popular buzzwords frequently used in present-day science policy. At the same time, however, ‘interdisciplinarity’ is vague and misty; the term is not well defined. In order to clarify its meaning, I classify different types of interdisciplinarity. By making use of analytical classification I show that a specific type of interdisciplinarity is involved in the nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science (NBIC) scenario on converging technologies (Roco–Bainbridge report of the US National Science Foundation). I argue that the NBIC scenario is based on a ‘technoobject-oriented interdisciplinarity’. This type of interdisciplinarity will be contrasted with the research program of the European Union on converging technologies (CTEKS) that widens the circles of convergence and aims to promote a different (‘problem-oriented’) type of interdisciplinarity.

[1]  Eric Ashby.  Thinking about complexity , 1977, Nature.

[2]  Nico Stehr,et al.  Knowledge Politics: Governing the Consequences of Science and Technology , 2005 .

[3]  R. Feynman.  There's plenty of room at the bottom , 1999 .

[4]  Jan C. Schmidt,et al.  Unbounded technologies : working through technological reductionism of nanotechnology , 2004 .

[5]  Torsten Rossmann,et al.  Bionik : aktuelle Forschungsergebnisse in Natur-, Ingenieur- und Geisteswissenschaft , 2005 .

[6]  R. Landauer,et al.  Thinking in Complexity: The Complex Dynamics of Matter, Mind, and Mankind , 1995 .

[7]  Janine M. Benyus,et al.  Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature , 1997 .

[8]  J. Barkley Rosser,et al.  DYNAMICS OF MARKETS : ECONOPHYSICS AND FINANCE , 2006 .

[9]  Ullica Segerstrale,et al.  Beyond the Science Wars: The Missing Discourse about Science and Society , 2000 .

[10]  Beyond the Science Wars: The Missing Discourse about Science and Society , 2001 .

[11]  Martin Scheringer,et al.  Transdisziplinarität: Problemorientierung ohne Methodenzwang , 1998 .

[12]  J. Klein,et al.  Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory, and Practice. , 1991 .

[13]  E. Jantsch,et al.  Towards Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity in Education and Innovation , 1972 .

[14]  Andrew Tymowski,et al.  Toward a Rational Society , 1971, Telos.

[15]  Hermann Haken,et al.  Dynamics of Synergetic Systems , 1980 .

[16]  Kai N. Lee.  Sustainability: A Philosophy of Adaptive Ecosystem Management , 2006 .

[17]  J. Fagerberg.  Innovation: A Guide to the Literature , 2003 .

[18]  I. D. Pearson,et al.  Converging Technologies and the Natural, Social and Cultural World Special Interest Group Report for the European Commission via an Expert Group on Foresighting the New Technology Wave , 2004 .

[19]  Edward W. Weidner.  Interdisciplinarity and higher education , 1973 .

[20]  G. Böhme.  Am Ende des Baconschen Zeitalters , 1992 .

[21]  Sidney Epton.  Interdisciplinary Analysis and Research: Theory and practice of problem focused Research and Development , 1989 .

[22]  Michael Decker.  Interdisciplinarity in technology assessment : implementation and its chances and limits , 2001 .

[23]  Sherwin Bailey,et al.  The two cultures: and a second look , 1964 .

[24]  D. Uhl.  Vision Assessment: Shaping Technology in 21st Century Society Towards a Repertoire for Technology Assessment , 2000 .

[25]  Ernst Helmstädter.  The Knowledge Society , 2009 .

[26]  武彦 福島.  持続可能性(Sustainability)の要件 , 2006 .

[27]  Hartmut von Hentig.  Magier oder Magister? : über die Einheit der Wissenschaft im Verständigungsprozeß , 1972 .

[28]  Susan E. Cozzens,et al.  Theories of Science in Society , 1991 .

[29]  Michio Kaku.  Zukunftsvisionen : wie Wissenschaft und Technik des 21. Jahrhunderts unser Leben revolutionieren , 1997 .

[30]  S. Berrol.  Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory, and Practice , 1992 .

[31]  Jan C. Schmidt.  Was umfasst heute Physik? Aspekte einer nachmodernen Physik , 2001 .

[32]  Marcel Mayor,et al.  Nanotechnology: Assessment and Perspectives , 2006 .

[33]  Ian Hacking,et al.  Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science , 1983 .

[34]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science , 2003 .

[35]  J. Bennett,et al.  Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding , 2010 .

[36]  Tom Quirk,et al.  There’s Plenty of Room at the Bottom , 2006, Size Really Does Matter.

[37]  J. Schummer,et al.  Interdisciplinary Issues in Nanoscale Research , 2003 .

[38]  F. Bacon,et al.  The Advancement of Learning and New Atlantis , 2005 .

[39]  A. Nordmann.  Was ist TechnoWissenschaft? — Zum Wandel der Wissenschaftskultur am Beispiel von Nanoforschung und Bionik , 2005 .

[40]  Armin Grunwald,et al.  Vision Assessment: Shaping Technology in 21st Century Society , 2000 .

[41]  Rosario N. Mantegna,et al.  Book Review: An Introduction to Econophysics, Correlations, and Complexity in Finance, N. Rosario, H. Mantegna, and H. E. Stanley, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000. , 2000 .