二十一世纪的科学、客观性和学术自由

IF 0.6 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
R. Joyce
{"title":"二十一世纪的科学、客观性和学术自由","authors":"R. Joyce","doi":"10.1017/S0940739121000230","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The publication of a book in 2020 that argues against repatriation, on the grounds that it is incompatible with the necessary objectivity required for the production of scientific knowledge, raises issues that most scholars consider long settled. Rather than engage in a detailed review, this commentary revisits the reasons why claims of contributing to universal knowledge are insufficient to justify exploitation of the physical remains, and cultural property, of people who object to specific lines of research and reminds readers that academic freedom is a mitigated freedom that is rooted in responsibilities and norms agreed on within disciplines, all of which today accept repatriation as part of the necessary redress of legacies of exploitation.","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"193 - 199"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Science, objectivity, and academic freedom in the twenty-first century\",\"authors\":\"R. Joyce\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0940739121000230\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The publication of a book in 2020 that argues against repatriation, on the grounds that it is incompatible with the necessary objectivity required for the production of scientific knowledge, raises issues that most scholars consider long settled. Rather than engage in a detailed review, this commentary revisits the reasons why claims of contributing to universal knowledge are insufficient to justify exploitation of the physical remains, and cultural property, of people who object to specific lines of research and reminds readers that academic freedom is a mitigated freedom that is rooted in responsibilities and norms agreed on within disciplines, all of which today accept repatriation as part of the necessary redress of legacies of exploitation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54155,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Cultural Property\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"193 - 199\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Cultural Property\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000230\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Cultural Property","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000230","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要2020年出版的一本书反对遣返,理由是遣返不符合产生科学知识所需的必要客观性,这引发了大多数学者认为早已解决的问题。这篇评论没有进行详细的审查,而是重新审视了为什么声称对普遍知识有贡献不足以证明开采自然遗迹和文化财产是正当的,反对特定研究领域的人,并提醒读者,学术自由是一种缓和的自由,植根于学科内部商定的责任和规范,今天所有学科都接受遣返,作为对剥削遗产的必要补救的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Science, objectivity, and academic freedom in the twenty-first century
Abstract The publication of a book in 2020 that argues against repatriation, on the grounds that it is incompatible with the necessary objectivity required for the production of scientific knowledge, raises issues that most scholars consider long settled. Rather than engage in a detailed review, this commentary revisits the reasons why claims of contributing to universal knowledge are insufficient to justify exploitation of the physical remains, and cultural property, of people who object to specific lines of research and reminds readers that academic freedom is a mitigated freedom that is rooted in responsibilities and norms agreed on within disciplines, all of which today accept repatriation as part of the necessary redress of legacies of exploitation.
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
International Journal of Cultural Property
International Journal of Cultural Property HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
13
×
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