Skip to main content

Philosophy of and as interdisciplinarity

Synthese volume 190, pages 1857–1864 (2013)Cite this article

An Erratum to this article was published on 19 March 2013

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  • Apostel, L., Berger, G., Briggs, A., Michaud, G. (eds) (1972) Interdisciplinarity: Problems of teaching and research in universities. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, E. (2002). Transformation of social and ecological issues into transdisciplinary research. In Knowledge for sustainable development. An insight into the encyclopedia of life support systems, UNESCO (Vol. 3) (pp. 949–963), Paris: UNESCO.

  • Böhme G., et al. (Eds.) (1983). Finalization in science. The social orientation of scientific progress. Dordrecht: Reidel.

  • Carrier M. (2001) Business as usual: On the prospect of normality in scientific research. In: Decker M. (ed) Interdisciplinarity in technology assessment, implementation and its chances and limits. Springer, Berlin, pp 25–31

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chubin, S., Porter, A. L., Rossini, F. A., Connolly, T. (eds) (1986) Interdisciplinary analysis and research. Theory and practice of problem-focused research and development. Mt Airy, Lomond

    Google Scholar 

  • De Bie P. (1970) Problemorientierte Forschung. Bericht an die Unesco. Ullstein, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Decker’s, M. (ed) (2001) Interdisciplinarity in technology assessment, implementation and its chances and limits. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz H., Leydesdorff L. (1997) Special issue on science policy dimensions of the triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Science and Public Policy 24(1): 2–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Frodeman, R. (2010). Experiments in field philosophy. The New York times: The stone. Retrieved from http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/23/experiments-in-field-philosophy/

  • Frodeman, R., Thompson Klein, J., Mitcham , C. (eds) (2010) The Oxford Handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Funtowicz S. O., Ravetz J. R. (1993) Science for the post-normal age. Futures 9: 739–755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galison P. (1996) Computer simulations and the trading zone. In: Galison P., Stump D.J. (eds) The disunity of science: Boundaries, contexts, and power. Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp 118–157

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons M. et al (1994) The new production of knowledge. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorman M. (2010) Trading zones and interactional expertise: Creating new kinds of collaboration. MIT Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway D. (2003) Modest_witness@second_millennium. In: MacKenzie D., Wajcman J. (eds) The social shaping of technology. Open University Press, Berkshire, pp 41–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch Hadorn G. et al (2008) Handbook of transdisciplinary research. Springer, The Netherlands

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann, M. H. G., Schmidt, J. C. (2011). Philosophy of (and as) interdisciplinarity. Workshop Report, Atlanta, 28–29 September 2009. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 42(1), 169–175. doi:10.1007/s10838-011-9150-4

  • Hottois G. (1984) Le signe et la technique. Aubier, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Jantsch E. (1970) Inter- and transdisziplinarity university: A systems approach to education and innovation. Policy Sciences 1: 403–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jungert, M. (ed) et al (2010) Interdisziplinarität. Theorie, Praxis, Probleme. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt

    Google Scholar 

  • Kastenhofer, K., & Schmidt, J. C. (2011). On intervention, construction and creation: Power and Knowledge in technoscience and late-modern technology. In T. B. Zülsdorfer et al. (Eds.), Quantum engagements: Social reflections of nanoscience and emerging technologies (pp. 177–194). Heidelberg: AKA/IOS Press.

  • Klein J. T. (1990) Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Wayne State University Press, Detroit

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein J. T. (1996) Crossing boundaries: Knowledge, disciplinarities, and interdisciplinarities. University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline’s S. J. (1995) Conceptual foundations of multidisciplinary thinking. Stanford University Press, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  • Mittelstraß J. (1987) Die Stunde der Interdisziplinarität. In: Kocka J. (ed.), Interdisziplinarität (pp 152–158).

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC, National Research Council. (2003). Beyond productivity: Information, technology, innovation, and creativity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

  • Nersessian N., Patton C. (2009) Model-based reasoning in interdisciplinary engineering. In: Meijers A. (ed) Handbook of the philosophy of technology and engineering sciences. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 687–718

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordmann A. (2005) Was ist TechnoWissenschaft?. In: Rossmann T., Tropea C. (eds) Bionik: Aktuelle Forschungsergebnisse aus Natur-, Ingenieur- und Geisteswissenschaften. Springer, Berlin, pp 291–311

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordmann A. et al (2008) Philosophy of nanotechnoscience. In: Schmid G. (ed) Nanotechnology, Vol. 1: Principles and fundamentals. Wiley, Weinheim, pp 217–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton B. G. (2005) Sustainability. A philosophy of adaptive ecosystem management. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ropohl G. (2005) Allgemeine Systemtheorie als transdisziplinäre Integrationsmethode. Technik- folgenabschätzung. Theorie & Praxis 14(2): 24–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossini, F. A., & Porter, A. L. (1979). Frameworks for integrating interdisciplinary research. Research Policy, 8, 70–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt J. C. (2007) Towards a philosophy of interdisciplinarity. An attempt to provide a classification and clarification. Poiesis and Praxis 5(1): 53–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt J. C. (2011) What is a problem? On problem-oriented interdisciplinarity. Poiesis and Praxis 7(4): 249–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt J. C. (2011) Toward an epistemology of nano-technoscience: Probing technoscience from a historical perspective. Poiesis and Praxis 8(2): 103–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, “Translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and Proffessionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387–420.

  • Ziman J. (2000) Postacademic science: Constructing knowledge with networks and norms. In: Segerstrale U. (ed) Beyond science wars: The missing discourse about science and society. State University of New York Press, New York, pp 135–154

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Darmstadt University of Applied Sciences, Darmstadt, Germany

    Michael H. G. Hoffmann, Jan C. Schmidt & Nancy J. Nersessian

Authors
  1. Michael H. G. Hoffmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan C. Schmidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nancy J. Nersessian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael H. G. Hoffmann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hoffmann, M.H.G., Schmidt, J.C. & J. Nersessian, N. Philosophy of and as interdisciplinarity. Synthese 190, 1857–1864 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0214-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0214-8

Keywords

  • Academic Discipline
  • Triple Helix
  • Trading Zone
  • Transdisciplinary Research
  • Social Epistemology