默顿科学规范的衰落与新的学术风气

IF 2.3 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Bruce Macfarlane
{"title":"默顿科学规范的衰落与新的学术风气","authors":"Bruce Macfarlane","doi":"10.1080/03054985.2023.2243814","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article provides a conceptual reformulation of Merton’s scientific ethos widely known by the acronym CUDOS (i.e. communism, universalism, disinterestedness and organised scepticism). While Merton perceived the threat to the autonomy of science as coming from outside the walls of academe, mainly in the form of nationalism and racism, the subsequent rise of neoliberalism and global market forces means that the scientific ethos is being undermined largely from within the university itself, leading to the DECAY (i.e. differentialism, egoism, capitalism and advocacy) of CUDOS. The STEM-ification of the humanities and social sciences academic community has led to the rise of a post-academic ethos. This manifests itself in professional pragmatism with academics facing both ways at the same time by remaining largely committed to Mertonian norms in theory but needing to adapt to the performative demands of DECAY as a new set of institutional norms that prevails in practice.","PeriodicalId":47910,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Education","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The DECAY of Merton’s scientific norms and the new academic ethos\",\"authors\":\"Bruce Macfarlane\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03054985.2023.2243814\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article provides a conceptual reformulation of Merton’s scientific ethos widely known by the acronym CUDOS (i.e. communism, universalism, disinterestedness and organised scepticism). While Merton perceived the threat to the autonomy of science as coming from outside the walls of academe, mainly in the form of nationalism and racism, the subsequent rise of neoliberalism and global market forces means that the scientific ethos is being undermined largely from within the university itself, leading to the DECAY (i.e. differentialism, egoism, capitalism and advocacy) of CUDOS. The STEM-ification of the humanities and social sciences academic community has led to the rise of a post-academic ethos. This manifests itself in professional pragmatism with academics facing both ways at the same time by remaining largely committed to Mertonian norms in theory but needing to adapt to the performative demands of DECAY as a new set of institutional norms that prevails in practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47910,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oxford Review of Education\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oxford Review of Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2023.2243814\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Review of Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2023.2243814","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","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

这篇文章提供了默顿的科学精神的概念上的重新表述,众所周知的首字母缩略词CUDOS(即共产主义,普遍主义,无私和有组织的怀疑主义)。虽然默顿认为对科学自主性的威胁来自学术墙外,主要以民族主义和种族主义的形式出现,但随后新自由主义和全球市场力量的兴起意味着科学精神在很大程度上从大学内部受到破坏,导致CUDOS的衰败(即差异主义、利己主义、资本主义和倡导)。人文社会科学学术界的stem化导致了后学术思潮的兴起。这在专业实用主义中表现出来,学者们同时面对两种方式,在理论上仍然主要致力于默顿规范,但需要适应衰变的表演要求,作为一套新的制度规范,在实践中盛行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The DECAY of Merton’s scientific norms and the new academic ethos
This article provides a conceptual reformulation of Merton’s scientific ethos widely known by the acronym CUDOS (i.e. communism, universalism, disinterestedness and organised scepticism). While Merton perceived the threat to the autonomy of science as coming from outside the walls of academe, mainly in the form of nationalism and racism, the subsequent rise of neoliberalism and global market forces means that the scientific ethos is being undermined largely from within the university itself, leading to the DECAY (i.e. differentialism, egoism, capitalism and advocacy) of CUDOS. The STEM-ification of the humanities and social sciences academic community has led to the rise of a post-academic ethos. This manifests itself in professional pragmatism with academics facing both ways at the same time by remaining largely committed to Mertonian norms in theory but needing to adapt to the performative demands of DECAY as a new set of institutional norms that prevails in practice.
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
Oxford Review of Education
Oxford Review of Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The Oxford Review of Education is a well established journal with an extensive international readership. It is committed to deploying the resources of a wide range of academic disciplines in the service of educational scholarship, and the Editors welcome articles reporting significant new research as well as contributions of a more analytic or reflective nature. The membership of the editorial board reflects these emphases, which have remained characteristic of the Review since its foundation. The Review seeks to preserve the highest standards of professional scholarship in education, while also seeking to publish articles which will be of interest and utility to a wider public, including policy makers.
×
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