Philosophy may relate to interdisciplinarity in two distinct ways On the one hand, philosophy may play an auxiliary role in the process of interdisciplinarity, typically through conceptual analysis, in the understanding that the disciplines themselves are the main epistemic players. This version of the relationship I characterise as ‘normal’ because it captures the more common pattern of the relationship, which in turn reflects an acceptance of the division of organized inquiry into disciplines. On the other hand, philosophy may be itself the site for the production of interdisciplinary knowledge, understood as a kind of second-order understanding of reality that transcends the sort of knowledge that the disciplines provide, left to their own devices. This is my own position, which I dub ‘deviant’ and to which most of this article is devoted. I begin by relating the two types of interdisciplinarity to the organization of inquiry, especially their respective attitudes to the history of science. Underlying the two types are contrasting notions of what constitutes the ‘efficient’ pursuit of knowledge. This difference is further explored in terms of the organization of the university. The normal/deviant distinction was already marked in the institution’s medieval origins in terms of the difference between Doctors and Masters, respectively, an artefact of which remains in the postgraduate/undergraduate degree distinction. In the context of the history of the university, the prospects for deviant interdisciplinarity were greatest from the early sixteenth to the early nineteenth century—the period called ‘early modern’ in the philosophy curriculum. Towards the end of that period, due to Kant and the generation of idealists who followed him, philosophy was briefly the privileged site for deviant interdisciplinarity. After Hegel’s death, the mantle of deviant interdisciplinarity increasingly passed to some version of ‘biology’. I explore the ‘Natur-’ and ‘Geisteswissenschaft’ versions of that post-philosophical vision, which continue to co-exist within today’s biological science. I then briefly examine the chequered reputation of Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, someone who exemplified the promise and perils of deviant interdisciplinarity over the past 200 years. I conclude with an Epilogue that considers contemporary efforts to engage philosophy in interdisciplinary work, invoking William James as an exemplar.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Arthur W. B. (2009) The nature of technology: What it is and how it evolves. Free Press, New York
Bateson G. (1979) Mind and nature: A necessary unity. Bantam Books, New York
Berkowitz R. (2005) The gift of science: Leibniz and the modern legal tradition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Bertalanffy L. v. (1950) An outline of general system theory. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 1: 134–165
Bordogna F. (2008) William James at the boundaries: Philosophy, science, and the geography of knowledge. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Bowler R. (2005) Sentient nature and human economy. History of the Human Sciences 19(1): 23–54
Burkhardt R. (1970) Lamarck, evolution and the politics of science. Journal of the History of Biology 3: 275–298
Cassirer, E. (1923). Substance and function (Orig. 1910). La Salle, IL: Open Court.
Cohen I. B. (1985) Revolution in science. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Collins R. (1998) The sociology of philosophies: A global theory of intellectual change. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Crease R., Mann C. (1986) The second creation: The makers of the revolution in twentieth-century physics. Macmillan, New York
Crombie, A. (1994). Styles of scientific thinking in the European tradition: The history of argument and explanation especially in the mathematical and biomedical sciences and arts (3 vols.). London: Duckworth.
Darnton R. (1984) The great cat massacre and other episodes in French Cultural History. Basic Books, New York
Dickens P. (2000) Social Darwinism: Linking evolutionary thought to social theory. Open University Press, Milton Keynes
Drexler E. (1986) Engines of creation: The coming age of nanotechnology. Doubleday, Garden City, NY
Dyson F. (2007) Our biotech future. The New York Review of Books 54(12): 4–8
Erikson E. (1968) Identity: Youth and crisis. W.W. Norton, New York
Fuller S. (2000) Thomas Kuhn: A philosophical history for our times. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Fuller S. (2006a) The philosophy of science and technology studies. Routledge, London
Fuller S. (2007a) New frontiers in science and technology studies. Polity, Cambridge
Fuller S. (2007b) The knowledge book: Key concepts in philosophy, science and culture. Acumen, Durham
Fuller, S. (2008a). Conatus. In M. Grenfell (Ed.), Pierre Bourdieu: Key concepts (Chap. 10). Stockfield: Acumen.
Fuller S. (2008b) The normative turn: Counterfactuals and a philosophical historiography of science. Isis 99: 576–584
Fuller S. (2009a) The sociology of intellectual life. Sage, London
Fuller S. (2009b) The genealogy of judgement: Towards a deep history of academic freedom. British Journal of Educational Studies 57: 164–177
Fuller S. (2010a) Science: The art of living. Acumen and McGill-Queens University Press, Durham
Fuller S. (2010b) Deviant interdisciplinarity. In: Frodeman R., Klein J. T., Mitcham C. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 50–64
Fuller S. (2011) Humanity 2.0: What it means to be human past, present and future. Palgrave Macmillan, London
Fuller, S., & Collier, J. (2004). Philosophy, rhetoric and the end of knowledge (2nd ed., Orig. by Fuller, 1993). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gillispie C. (1958) Lamarck and Darwin in the history of science. American Scientist 46(4): 388–409
Harrington A. (1999) Holism in German culture from Wilhelm II to Hitler. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
Harrison P. (2007) The fall of man and the foundations of science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Heidelberger M. (2004) Nature from within: Gustav Fechner and his psychophysical worldview. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, PA
Holton G. (1993) From the Vienna Circle to Harvard Square: The Americanization of a European World Conception. In: Stadler F., Scientific philosophy: Origins and developments. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 47–74
Kitcher P. (1993) The advancement of science. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Koehler W. (1938) The place of value in a world of facts. Liveright Publishing, New York
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed., Orig. 1962). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lamont M. (2009) How professors think. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Laudan L. (1981) Science and hypothesis. Reidel, Dordrecht
Lynch W. (2002) Solomon’s child: Method in the early Royal Society of London. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, CA
Mendelsohn E. (1974) Reduction and revolution: The sociology of methodological and philosophical concerns in 19th century biology. In: Elkana Y. (Ed.), Interaction between science and philosophy. Humanities Press, New York, pp 407–427
Menudo J. M. (2010) Perfect’ Competition in A.-R.-J. Turgot: A contractualist theory of just exchange. Economie et Société 44(12): 1885–1916
Merz, J. T. (1965). A History of European thought in the 19th century (4 vols., Orig. 1896–1914). New York: Dover.
Morange M. (1998) A history of molecular biology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
O’Rourke, M., & Crowley, S.J. (2012). Philosophical intervention and cross-disciplinary science. The story of the toolbox project. Synthese. doi:10.1007/s11229-012-175-y
Packard A. (1901) Lamarck, the founder of evolution. Longmans, New York
Rabinbach A. (1990) The human motor: Energy, fatigue, and the origins of modernity. Harper Collins, New York
Richards R. J. (1987) Darwin and the emergence of evolutionary theories of mind and behavior. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Ruse M. (1999) Mystery of mysteries: Is evolution a social construction?. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Sapp J. (2008) The iconoclastic research program of Carl Woese. In: Harmen O., Dietrich M. (Eds.), Rebels, mavericks, and heretics in biology. Yale University Press, New Haven
Schnädelbach H. (1984) Philosophy in Germany, 1831–1933. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Schrödinger, E. (1955). What is life? The physical aspects of the living cell (Orig. 1944). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schroeder-Gudehus B. et al (1989) Nationalism and internationalism. In: Olby R. (Ed.), Companion to the history of modern science. Routledge, London, pp 909–919
Schumpeter, J. (1950). Capitalism, socialism and democracy (2nd ed., Orig. 1942). New York: Harper and Row.
Sullivan K. (2011) The inner lives of the medieval inquisitors. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Teilhardde Chardin P. (1955) The phenomenon of man. Harper and Row, New York
Tuana, N. (2012). Embedding philosophers in the practices of science: Bringing humanities to the sciences. Synthese. doi:10.1007/s11229-012-0171-2.
Tullock G. (1966) The organization of inquiry. Duke University Press, Durham, NC
Veit-Brause I. (2001) Scientists and the cultural politics of academic disciplines in late 19th century Germany: Emil DuBois-Reymond and the controversy over the role of the cultural sciences. History of the Human Sciences 14(4): 31–56
Wilmut I, Campbell K., Tudge C. (2000) The second creation: Dolly and the age of biological control. Farrar Straus and Giroux, New York
Yates F. (1966) The art of memory. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London
About this article
Cite this article
Fuller, S. Deviant interdisciplinarity as philosophical practice: prolegomena to deep intellectual history. Synthese 190, 1899–1916 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0208-6
- Deviant interdisciplinarity
- Normal interdisciplinarity
- William James