什么是基础研究?历史语义学的启示

IF 3.2 2区 哲学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Minerva Pub Date : 2014-01-01 DOI:10.1007/s11024-014-9255-0
Désirée Schauz
{"title":"什么是基础研究?历史语义学的启示","authors":"Désirée Schauz","doi":"10.1007/s11024-014-9255-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For some years now, the concept of basic research has been under attack. Yet although the significance of the concept is in doubt, basic research continues to be used as an analytical category in science studies. But what exactly is basic research? What is the difference between basic and applied research? This article seeks to answer these questions by applying historical semantics. I argue that the concept of basic research did not arise out of the tradition of pure science. On the contrary, this new concept emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a time when scientists were being confronted with rising expectations regarding the societal utility of science. Scientists used the concept in order to try to bridge the gap between the promise of utility and the uncertainty of scientific endeavour. Only after 1945, when United States science policy shaped the notion of basic research, did the concept revert to the older ideals of pure science. This revival of the purity discourse was caused by the specific historical situation in the US at that time: the need to reform federal research policy after the Second World War, the new dimension of ethical dilemmas in science and technology during the atomic era, and the tense political climate during the Cold War.</p>","PeriodicalId":47427,"journal":{"name":"Minerva","volume":"52 ","pages":"273-328"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4141150/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What is Basic Research? Insights from Historical Semantics.\",\"authors\":\"Désirée Schauz\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11024-014-9255-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>For some years now, the concept of basic research has been under attack. Yet although the significance of the concept is in doubt, basic research continues to be used as an analytical category in science studies. But what exactly is basic research? What is the difference between basic and applied research? This article seeks to answer these questions by applying historical semantics. I argue that the concept of basic research did not arise out of the tradition of pure science. On the contrary, this new concept emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a time when scientists were being confronted with rising expectations regarding the societal utility of science. Scientists used the concept in order to try to bridge the gap between the promise of utility and the uncertainty of scientific endeavour. Only after 1945, when United States science policy shaped the notion of basic research, did the concept revert to the older ideals of pure science. This revival of the purity discourse was caused by the specific historical situation in the US at that time: the need to reform federal research policy after the Second World War, the new dimension of ethical dilemmas in science and technology during the atomic era, and the tense political climate during the Cold War.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47427,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minerva\",\"volume\":\"52 \",\"pages\":\"273-328\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4141150/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Minerva\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-014-9255-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-014-9255-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

几年来,基础研究的概念一直受到攻击。然而,尽管这一概念的意义受到质疑,基础研究仍被用作科学研究中的一个分析范畴。但究竟什么是基础研究?基础研究与应用研究有什么区别?本文试图运用历史语义学来回答这些问题。我认为,基础研究的概念并不是从纯粹科学的传统中产生的。恰恰相反,这一新概念出现于 19 世纪末 20 世纪初,当时科学家们正面临着人们对科学的社会效用越来越高的期望。科学家们使用这一概念,试图弥合实用性承诺与科学努力的不确定性之间的差距。只是在 1945 年之后,当美国的科学政策塑造了基础研究的概念时,这一概念才重新回到了纯粹科学的旧理想中。纯科学论述的复兴是由美国当时的特定历史情况造成的:第二次世界大战后改革联邦研究政策的需要、原子时代科技伦理困境的新维度以及冷战期间紧张的政治气候。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What is Basic Research? Insights from Historical Semantics.

For some years now, the concept of basic research has been under attack. Yet although the significance of the concept is in doubt, basic research continues to be used as an analytical category in science studies. But what exactly is basic research? What is the difference between basic and applied research? This article seeks to answer these questions by applying historical semantics. I argue that the concept of basic research did not arise out of the tradition of pure science. On the contrary, this new concept emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a time when scientists were being confronted with rising expectations regarding the societal utility of science. Scientists used the concept in order to try to bridge the gap between the promise of utility and the uncertainty of scientific endeavour. Only after 1945, when United States science policy shaped the notion of basic research, did the concept revert to the older ideals of pure science. This revival of the purity discourse was caused by the specific historical situation in the US at that time: the need to reform federal research policy after the Second World War, the new dimension of ethical dilemmas in science and technology during the atomic era, and the tense political climate during the Cold War.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Minerva
Minerva Multiple-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Minerva is devoted to the study of ideas, traditions, cultures and institutions in science, higher education and research. It is concerned no less with history than with present practice, and with the local as well as the global. It speaks to the scholar, the teacher, the policy-maker and the administrator. It features articles, essay reviews and ''special'' issues on themes of topical importance. It represents no single school of thought, but welcomes diversity, within the rules of rational discourse. Its contributions are peer-reviewed. Its audience is world-wide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信