Where is disciplinarity going? Meeting on the borderland

This article analyzes the cognitive structures and dynamics of a form of scientific discipline that differs importantly both from the disciplinary format of the 19th-century university system, and from the profile proposed by much postmodern interdisciplinary (anti-disciplinary) discussion. This recent form of discipline, here termed the ‘new disciplinarity’, is a product of the increasing complexity of scientific knowledge and activity. The approach privileges cognition. It emphasizes the concepts of disciplinary referent, robust boundaries, ‘borderland’, combinatorials and projects. It suggests that the new disciplinarity is highly elastic and that it is a spawning-ground for new disciplines.

[1]  W. Patrick McCray,et al.  Will small be beautiful? Making policies for our nanotech future , 2005 .

[2]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Nanotechnology as a field of science: Its delineation in terms of journals and patents , 2007, Scientometrics.

[3]  Walter Rüegg,et al.  A history of the university in Europe , 2004 .

[4]  S. Weiss.  Fluorescence spectroscopy of single biomolecules. , 1999, Science.

[5]  M. Gibbons,et al.  Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty , 2003 .

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

[7]  S. Terry,et al.  Research-Technology and Cultural Change : Instrumentation, Genericity, Transversality , 2007 .

[8]  Terry Shinn.  Formes de division du travail scientifique et convergence intellectuelle. La recherche technico-instrumentale , 2000 .

[9]  Imre Lakatos,et al.  Mathematics, science and epistemology: Indexes , 1978 .

[10]  Erwin Schrödinger,et al.  What is life ? and other scientific essays , 1965 .

[11]  J. Ben-David,et al.  The Scientist's Role in Society: A Comparative Study , 1973 .

[12]  Juha Tuunainen,et al.  Hybrid practices? Contributions to the debate on the mutation of science and university , 2005 .

[13]  Julie Thompson Klein,et al.  Creating Interdisciplinary Campus Cultures: A Model for Strength and Sustainability , 2009 .

[14]  M. Stevens,et al.  COMMENSURATION AS A SOCIAL PROCESS , 1998 .

[15]  Eric Winsberg,et al.  Handshaking Your Way to the Top: Simulation at the Nanoscale , 2006, Philosophy of Science.

[16]  S. Schwartzman,et al.  The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1994 .

[17]  Bernward Joerges,et al.  The Transverse Science and Technology Culture: Dynamics and Roles of Research-technology , 2002 .

[18]  Yves Gingras,et al.  Physics and the Rise of Scientific Research in Canada , 1991 .

[19]  S. Gambhir,et al.  Quantum Dots for Live Cells, in Vivo Imaging, and Diagnostics , 2005, Science.

[20]  M. Lamont,et al.  Beyond blind faith: overcoming the obstacles to interdisciplinary evaluation , 2006 .

[21]  Julie Thompson Klein,et al.  Crossing Boundaries: Knowledge, Disciplinarities, and Interdisciplinarities , 1996 .

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

[23]  Axes thématiques et marchés de diffusion : La science en France, 1975-1999 , 2000 .

[24]  Bernward Joerges,et al.  Instrumentation between science, state and industry , 2001 .

[25]  D. Price.  Little Science, Big Science , 1965 .

[26]  G. Dosi,et al.  The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: An illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called ‘European Paradox’ , 2006 .

[27]  Imre Lakatos,et al.  The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes , 1978 .

[28]  J. Klein.  Humanities, Culture, and Interdisciplinarity: The Changing American Academy , 2005 .

[29]  Lily E. Kay,et al.  The molecular vision of life : Caltech, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the rise of the new biology , 1994 .

[30]  I. Stengers,et al.  Histoire de la chimie , 1993 .

[31]  R. Whitley.  The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences (Second Edition: with new introductory chapter entitled 'Science Transformed? The Changing Nature of Knowledge Production at the End of the Twentieth Century') , 1984 .

[32]  Andrew Abbott,et al.  Things of Boundaries , 1995 .

[33]  N. Mullins.  The development of a scientific specialty: The phage group and the origins of molecular biology , 1972 .

[34]  M. Carrier,et al.  Science in the Context of Application: Methodological Change, Conceptual Transformation, Cultural Reorientation , 2011 .

[35]  Cyrus C. M. Mody.  Corporations, Universities, and Instrumental Communities: Commercializing Probe Microscopy, 1981-1996 , 2006 .

[36]  N. Bohr,et al.  Light and Life , 1933, Nature.

[37]  M. Meyer,et al.  Nanotechnology-interdisciplinarity, patterns of collaboration and differences in application , 1998, Scientometrics.

[38]  Johannes Lenhard,et al.  Simulation : pragmatic construction of reality , 2006 .

[39]  R. Kohler,,et al.  Landscapes and Labscapes: Exploring the Lab-Field Border in Biology , 2002 .

[40]  D. Rudge.  :What Makes Biology Unique? Considerations on the Autonomy of a Scientific Discipline. , 2005 .

[41]  B. Bensaude-Vincent,et al.  Lavoisier: Memoires d'une Revolution , 1995 .

[42]  Ernest Braun,et al.  Out of the Crystal Maze: Chapters from the History of Solid‐State Physics , 1993 .

[43]  Terry Shinn,et al.  Instrument Research, Tools, and the Knowledge Enterprise 1999-2009 , 2011 .

[44]  T. Shinn.  When is Simulation a Research Technology? Practices, Markets, and Lingua Franca , 2006 .

[45]  P. Kivisto.  Chaos of disciplines , 2002 .

[46]  A. Marcovich,et al.  Socio/intellectual patterns in nanoscale research: Feynman Nanotechnology Prize laureates, 1993—2007 , 2010 .

[47]  Tam-Kien Duong.  Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent, Les vertiges de la technoscience. Façonner le monde atome par atome , 2010 .

[48]  J. Ben-David,et al.  Roles and Innovations in Medicine , 1960, American Journal of Sociology.

[49]  S. Treiman,et al.  QED and the Men Who Made It: Dyson, Feynman, Schwinger and Tomonaga , 1994 .

[50]  I. Ràfols,et al.  Strategies for Knowledge Acquisition in Bionanotechnology: Why Are Interdisciplinary Practices Less Widespread Than Expected? , 2007 .

[51]  M. Albornoz.  Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty , 2003 .

[52]  Imre Lakatos,et al.  The methodology of scientific research programmes: Contents , 1978 .

[53]  A. Marcovich,et al.  The Cognitive, Instrumental and Institutional Origins of Nanoscale Research: The Place of Biology , 2011 .

[54]  I. Ràfols,et al.  STRATEGIES FOR KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION IN BIONANOTECHNOLOGY , 2007 .

[55]  Diana Crane,et al.  Invisible colleges. Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities , 1972, Medical History.

[56]  Terry Shinn,et al.  New sources of radical innovation: research-technologies, transversality and distributed learning in a post-industrial order , 2005 .

[57]  Jane Calvert,et al.  What’s Special about Basic Research? , 2006 .

[58]  P. Morris,et al.  From classical to modern chemistry : the instrumental revolution , 2002 .