16 KiB
TOS-H23
About the course
The course gives an introduction to theories of science and relevant social science and humanities scholarship, with an emphasis on the history and philosophy of science and the social organization and dynamics of various academic fields, including their strategies for producing knowledge and the interaction between research and society. This includes an introduction to critical perspectives, such as post-/decolonial and feminist perspectives on science.
The overall aim of the course is to help the participants to successfully conduct their PhD project. Success ultimately and invariably depends on hard scientific work, but what "success" means is defined by institutional, societal, and political contexts within which scientific knowledge is produced. The course engages with issues such as philosophical assumptions underlying high-quality scholarship, making claims about truth and objectivity, professional and societal relevance of science, and navigation of academic challenges. To contribute to a better understanding of contemporary academic work, insights into the history of science and academic scholarship and the key features of the modern university are conveyed. Moreover, the course provides one of the few arenas in which PhD students from a wide variety of disciplines meet and work together, which increases their interdisciplinary sensitivities.
Formalities
The course is given over six days, with lectures on the following 3 x 2 days,
from 09.15 to 15.45:
Day 1 Philosophy and ethics I (Thomas, Jonathan): 20.09.
Day 2 Philosophy and ethics II (Mattias, May): 21.09.
Day 3 Science as institution and practice I (Terje, Govert): 04.10.
Day 4 Science as institution and practice II (Knut, Thomas): 05.10.
Day 5 Critical perspectives I (Sofia, Elisabeth): 15.11.
Day 6 Critical perspectives II (Thomas): 16.11.
Mini-conference: 24.11.
Venues for lectures: TBA (Dragvoll campus)
The course consists of lectures, group work, and plenary discussions. To ensure sufficient engagement with the course’s content, to enable peer-learning and to encourage networking across disciplines physical attendance is mandatory and no digital alternatives for participation are provided. Participants can apply for shorter leaves of absence that should altogether not be longer than one day.
Lecturers
Professor Thomas Berker (course responsible: thomas.berker@ntnu.no), Associate Professor Terje Finstad, Professor Jonathan Knowles, Associate Professor Elisabeth Stubberud, Researcher Mattias Solli, Professor emeritus Knut H. Sørensen, Professor Siri Øyslebø Sørensen, Professor May Thorseth, and Research Professor Govert Valkenburg.
Communication
This website is the main and authoritative channel of communication to the participants. For individual questions, please contact thomas.berker@ntnu.no.
- the updated program (which will be published in August)
- the readings
All files including the readings are published as releases (see the releases-button on top or use this link), where the newest release is on top. Those of you who consider themselves computer-literate can clone this repository and/or follow changes through the rss feed - or even get an account from me to be able to push changes.
Credit points
To pass the course, you need to attend the lectures, present a paper at the course conference, and/or deliver a course assignment text (see below). The deadline for the course assignment is January 31st, 2024.
KULT8851 gives 10 credit points. A presentation at the course conference is mandatory in addition to a short conference paper (4000-5000 words).
KULT8850 gives 7.5 credit points, which presupposes a presentation at the course conference and the handing in of an extended abstract (1000-2000 words).
Required readings
Readings are listed under each of the lectures. All the literature is accessible online or will be made available to the participants in a drop box folder to which they will be given access. Reading and preparing for lectures: All the essential literature must be read before the lectures. Please make sure to prepare some comments/questions for the readings.
Course program
Wednesday September 20 (day 1), Philosophy and Research Ethics I
0915 Welcome, structure of the course, course assignment, and other practical information
0930 Presentation round: My Ph.D. project in three sentences
1000 Break
1015 Group work: Getting to know each other
1045 Break
The following lectures on day 1 and 2 will take up philosophical questions about method and truth in relation to natural science, social science, and the humanities, rounding off with a discussion of general research ethics.
1100-1545 (Lunch 1200-1300): Jonathan Knowles: Philosophy of Science: Objectivity, Method, and Truth
This session introduces the classical issues of the philosophy of science, framed through the lens of the nature and possibility of objectivity in research.
Essential readings:
- Gaukroger, Stephen. 2012. Objectivity: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Chapter 1.
- Jonathan Knowles, Theory of science: A Short Introduction: ‘Logical Positivism’ (p. 21-30).
- Popper, Karl. 1972. The Bucket and the Searchlight: Two Theories of Knowledge. Appendix to Objective Knowledge. An Evolutionary Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Kuhn, Thomas S. 2012. Postscript - 1969. In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 173-208. Fourth edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- H.G. Gadamer 'The universality of the hermeneutical problem' in his Philosophical Hermeneutics, ed. D. Linge, California UP 1976.
- S Harding '"Strong objectivity" and socially situated knowledge' Chapter 6 of her Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Cornell UP 1991.
Additional readings:
- Jonathan Knowles, Theory of science: A Short Introduction: Ch. 4: Further Developments in Philosophy of Science: Lakatos, Feyerabend, Laudan, The Sociology of Scientific Knowledge.
- M. Foucault 'The Discourse on Language' Appendix to The Archaeology of Knowledge. New York, Pantheon Books 1972, http://commons.princeton.edu/shakespeares-language/wp-content/uploads/sites/41/2017/09/Foucault-The-Discourse-on-Language.pdf
Thursday, September 21 (day 2), Philosophy and Research Ethics II
0915-1200: Mattias Solli: The Role of the Body and Literacy in Research
This session deals with two enabling factors within science and their impact on our understanding of science: The body and literacy.
- What role does the body play in the production of scientific knowledge?
- How does the customary association between literacy and academic knowledge influence how we theorize about science?
- What if things were different – what can we learn from knowledge systems that incorporate the knowing body in more articulate ways than we usually do in the Western academic tradition, without any involvement of literacy?
Essential readings:
- Molander, B. (2015). Chapter 2: Tacit Knowledge and Silenced Knowledge. The Body, Culture, Action—and Language. In The practice of knowing and knowing in practices (pp. 35-70). Peter Lang Edition.
- Ong, W. (2013). Chapter 1: Transformation of the Word and Alienation. In Interfaces of the Word: Studies in the Evolution of Consciousness and Culture (pp 17-49). Cornell University Press.
Additional reading:
- Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). The primacy of perception and its philosophical consequences. In The primacy of perception (pp. 12-27). Northwestern University Press.
1200-1300: Lunch
1300-1545: May Thorseth: Research ethics
This session deals with three levels of research ethics:
Quality of research – good research conduct and the ethos of science
Protecting persons and/or groups affected by research
The social responsibility of research (broad research ethics)
Essential readings:
Kaiser, M (2014) The integrity of science. Lost in translation? Best practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology. 28(2):339-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpg.2014.03.003.
Ruyter, K.W. (2019) The history of research ethics. Available at : https://www.forskningsetikk.no/en/resources/the-research-ethics-library/systhematic-and-historical-perspectives/the-history-of-research-ethics/.
Guillemin, M & Guillam, L (2004) Ethics, reflexivity and “ethically important moments” in research. Qualitative Inquiry. 10(2):261-280. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800403262360.
Sarewitz, D (2016) The pressure to publish pushes down quality. Nature. 533:147https://www.nature.com/articles/533147a.
Additional reading:
Browse through the NESH guidelines, available in both Norwegian: https://www.forskningsetikk.no/retningslinjer/hum-sam/forskningsetiske-retningslinjer-for-samfunnsvitenskap-og-humaniora/ or English: https://www.forskningsetikk.no/en/guidelines/social-sciences-humanities-law-and-theology/guidelines-for-research-ethics-in-the-social-sciences-humanities-law-and-theology/
1545 End of day
Tuesday, April 11 (day 3) Theories about science in context I
0915 Thomas Berker: Introduction: History, institutions, practices
1000 Break
1015 Berker cont.
1100 Terje Finstad: History of science and changes in scientific life. Situating and historicizing your own discipline/subject.
Essential readings:
William Clark. 2008. Academic charisma and the origins of the research university. University of Chicago Press, p. 435-476.
Additional readings:
Lorraine Daston and Peter Galison. 1992. The image of objectivity. In: Representations 40, p. 81-128
Steven Shapin. 2010. Never pure. Historical studies of science as if it was produced by people with bodies, situated in time, space, culture, and society, and struggling for credibility and authority. The Johns Hopkins University Press, p. 1-15.
1200 Lunch
1315 Finstad cont.
1400 Govert Valkenburg: Science as practice
Essential readings:
H.M. Collins and Steven Yearly (1992). Epistemological Chicken, pp. 301-326 in Andrew Pickering (ed.): Science as Practice and Culture, Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Michel Callon and Bruno Latour (1992). Don’t throw the baby out with the Bath School! A reply to Collins and Yearley, pp. 343-368 in Andrew Pickering (ed.): Science as Practice and Culture, Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Noortje Marres (2018). Why We Can't Have Our Facts Back. Engaging Science, Technology and Society, vol. 4, 2018.
Additional reading:
Valkenburg, G. (2021). Engineering as a socio-political practice. In D. P. Michelfelder & N. Doorn (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Engineering. Routledge. [While strictly about engineering and not scientific research, much of this chapter resonates and pertains to science.]
Suchman, L. (2014). Reconfiguring practices. In C. Coopmans, J. Vertesi, M. E. Lynch, & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice revisited (pp. 333-335). MIT Press.
1445 Break
1500 Valkenburg, cont.
1545 End of day
Wednesday April 12 (day 4) Theories about science in context II
0915 Knut H. Sørensen: The university as a place and a context for research: Academic freedom and autonomy, the quest for excellence, and strained collegiality.
Essential reading:
Knut H. Sørensen and Sharon Traweek: Questing Excellence in Academia: A Tale of Two Universities (Routledge 2022). Chapter 3. In the Shadows of Excellence and Neoliberal Interventions: Enactments of Academic Autonomy and Strained Collegiality (33 p.) The whole book is available here: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9780367259334
1000 Break
1015 Sørensen, cont.
1100 Break
1115 Sørensen, cont.
1200 Lunch
1300 Thomas Berker: Introduction to groupwork: Your scientific practices
1315 Groupwork
1400 Break
1415 Groupwork
1500 Break
1515 Presentation groupwork
1545 End of day
Monday, May 8 (day 5) Critical perspectives I
0915 Siri Øyslebø Sørensen: Situated knowledge and feminist critique of science
In this session we will work on the concept of objectivity based in feminist critique of universality in science and discuss the relevance and importance of acknowledging researcher positionalities.
Essential reading:
Collins, Patricia Hill 1986. Learning from the outsider within: the sociological significance of black feminist thought i Social Problems 33(6): 14-32 https://www.jstor.org/stable/800672
Haraway, Donna 1988. ”Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective” Feminist Studies, 14(3): 575-599 (24 s) https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3178066.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A764992d6e6cdb51420%208857639557edb6
Harding, Sandra, 2001 “Feminist Standpoint Epistemology” in Lederman, M. & Bartsch, i The Gender and Science Reader, London: Routledge: 145-165 (pdf)
Additional readings:
Alcoff, Linda. “The Problem of Speaking for Others.” Cultural Critique, no. 20 (1991): 5–32. https://doi.org/10.2307/1354221.
Longino, Helen E. 1993. Feminist Standpoint Theory and the Problems of Knowledge (Review essay discussing Smith, D., Stanley, L., Hekman, S. and Harding, S.), Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 1993, vol. 19, no. 1: 201-2012 http://www.jstor.org/stable/3174750
Mellor, K. 2022, ‘Developing a decolonial gaze: Articulating research/er positionality and relationship to colonial power’, Access: Critical explorations of equity in higher education, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 26–41 (pdf)
1130 Lunch
1230 Elisabeth Stubberud: Decolonizing knowledge production and objectivity
Essential readings:
Fjellheim, Eva Maria (2020) 'Through our stories we resist', https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-edit/10.4324/9780367853785-12/stories-resist-eva-maria-fjellheim
Kuokkanen, Rauna (2008) ‘What is hospitality in the Academy? Epistemic Ignorance and the (Im)Possible Gift’ in Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies vol. 30(1), pp. 60-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714410701821297
SAIH: An introduction to decolonization https://saih.no/assets/docs/Avkolonisering/Avkolonisering-ENG.pdf
Bhambra, Gurminder K. (2014) ‘Postcolonial and decolonial dialogues’ in Postcolonial Studies Vol. 17(2), pp. 115-121. https://doi.org/10.1080/13688790.2014.966414
Additional reading:
Dankertsen, Astrid (2022) ' Avkolonisering av akademia fra et samisk perspektiv' https://nordopen.nord.no/nord-xmlui/handle/11250/3038295
1500 We create a “ledger of complaints” together
1545 End
Wednesday May 09 (day 6) Critical perspectives II
0915 Thomas Berker: The many uses of science: engagement, interdisciplinarity, innovation and sustainability
Essential reading:
Wynne, Brian. 2006. Public Engagement as a Means of Restoring Public Trust in Science – Hitting the Notes, but Missing the Music? Public Health Genomics 9 (3): 211–20.
Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., Joakim Juhl, and Erik Aarden. “Challenging the ‘Deficit Model’ of Innovation: Framing Policy Issues under the Innovation Imperative.” Research Policy, New Frontiers in Science, Technology and Innovation Research from SPRU’s 50th Anniversary Conference, 48, no. 4 (May 1, 2019): 895–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.015.
Berker, Thomas. “Negotiating research norms between academic and industrial research. The case of a research centre on zero emission buildings in Norway”, to be published in Nordic Architectural Research.
Collins, Harry, Robert Evans, and Mike Gorman. “Trading Zones and Interactional Expertise.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, Case studies of expertise and experience, 38, no. 4 (December 2007): 657–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2007.09.003.
Additional reading:
Collins, H.M. and Robert Evans. 2002. The Third Wave of Science Studies: Studies of Expertise and Experience. Social Studies of Science 32 (2): 235–96.
Latour, B. (2018) Down to Earth: Politics in the New Climatic Regime. Polity Press.
1000 Break
1015 Thomas Berker cont.
1100 Break
1115 Thomas Berker cont.
1200 Lunch
1300 Thomas Berker: Introduction and group work on the course assignment
1545 End of day