Between charisma and heuristics: Four styles of interdisciplinarity

Science and Public Policy

Volumn 33, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 423-434

  Lengwiler, Martin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT; TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT; UNIVERSITY SECTOR;

CENTRAL EUROPE; EURASIA; EUROPE; GERMANY;

EID: 33749175104     PISSN: 03023427     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/147154306781778821     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Collins, Harry M 2001. Tacit knowledge, trust and the Q of sapphire. Social Studies of Science, 31(1), 71-85.
2. Eisenstadt, S N 1968. Introduction. In On Charisma and Institution Building, Max Weber, edited and with an introduction by S N Eisenstadt, pp. IX-LVI. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3. Fleck, Ludwik 1979. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4. Gebhardt, Winfried 1993a. Einleitung: Grundlinien der Entwicklung des Charismakonzeptes in den Sozialwissenschaften. In Charisma: Theorie, Religion, Politik, eds. Winfried Gebhardt, Arnold Zingerle and Michael N Ebertz, pp. 1-12. Berlin: De Gruyter.
5. Gebhardt, Winfried 1993b. Charisma und Ordnung: Formen des institutionalisierten Charisma - Überlegungen im Anschluss an Max Weber. In Charisma: Theorie, Religion, Politik, eds. Winfried Gebhardt, Arnold Zingerle and Michael N Ebertz, pp. 47-68. Berlin: De Gruyter.
6. Gerwin, Robert 1996. Im Windschatten der 68er ein Stück Demokratisierung. Die Satzungsreform von 1972 und das Harnack-Prinzip. In Die Kaiser-Wilhelm-/Max-Planck-Gesellschaft und ihre Institute. Studien zu ihrer Geschichte: Das Hamack-Prinzip, eds. Bernhard vom Brocke and Hubert Laitko, pp. 211-224. Berlin: De Gruyter.
7. Gibbons, Michael and Helga Nowotny 2001. The potential of transdisciplinarity. In Transdisciplinarity: Joint Problem Solving among Science, Technology, and Society. An Effective Way for Managing Complexity, eds. Julie Thompson Klein et al, pp. 67-80. Basel: Birkhäuser.
8. Guggenheim, Michael 2005. Organisierte Umwelt. Umweltdien-stleistungsfirmen zwischen Wissenschaft, Wirtschaft und Politik. Bielefeld: transcript.
9. Häberli, Rudolf et al 2001. Synthesis. In Transdisciplinarity: Joint Problem Solving among Science, Technology, and Society. An Effective Way for Managing Complexity, eds. Julie Thompson Klein et al, pp. 6-22. Basel: Birkhäuser.
10. Heckhausen, Heinz 1987. Interdisziplinäre Forschung zwischen Intra-, Multi- und Chimären-Disziplinarität. In Interdisziplinarität. Praxis - Herausforderung - Ideologie, ed. Jürgen Kocka, pp. 129-145. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.
11. Heintz, Bettina 2000. Die Innenwelt der Mathematik: Zur Kultur und Praxis einer beweisenden Disziplin. Wien: Springer-Verlag.
12. Heintz, Bettina, Martina Merz and Christina Schumacher. 2004. Wissenschaft, die Grenzen schafft. Geschlechterkonstellationen im disziplinären Vergleich. Bielefeld: transcript.
13. Hohn, Hans-Willy 1998. Kognitive Strukturen und Organisations-probleme der Forschung. Frankfurt/M.: Campus.
14. Klein, Julie Thompson 1990. Interdisciplinarity. History, Theory, and Practice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
15. Klein, Julie Thompson 2001. The discourse of transdisciplinarity: an expanding global field. In Transdisciplinarity: Joint Problem Solving among Science, Technology, and Society. An Effective Way for Managing Complexity, eds. Julie Thompson Klein et al, pp. 35-44. Basel: Birkhäuser.
16. Knorr Cetina, Karin 1999. Epistemic Cultures: How Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
17. Laudel, Grit 1999. Interdisziplinäre Forschungskooperation. Erfolgsbedingungen der Institution "Sonderforschungsbereich". Berlin: Edition Sigma.
18. Maasen, Sabine 2000. Inducing interdisciplinarity: irresistible infliction? The example of a research group at the Center for Interdisciplinary Research (ZiF), Bielefeld, Germany. In Practicing Interdisciplinarity, eds. Peter Weingart and Nico Stehr, pp. 173-193. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
19. Mayntz, Renate 1985. Forschungsmanagement. Steuerungsversuche zwischen Scylla und Charybdis. Probleme der Organisation und Leitung von hochschulfreien, öffentlich finanzierten Forschungsinstituten. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
20. Merz, Martina 1999. Multiplex and unfolding: computer simulation in particle physics. Science in Context, 12(2), 293-316.
21. Morrison, Margaret and Mary S Morgan 1999. Introduction. In Models as Mediators: Perspectives on Natural and Social Science, eds. Mary S Morgan and Margaret Morrison, pp. 1-9. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Nowotny, Helga, Peter Scott and Michael Gibbons 2003. "Mode 2" revisited: the new production of knowledge. Minerva, 41(3), 179-194.
23. OECD, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, CERI) 1972. Interdisciplinarity: Problems of Teaching and Research in Universities. Paris: OECD.
24. Pestre, Dominique 2003. Regimes of knowledge production in society: towards a more political and social reading. Minerva, 41(3), 245-261.
25. Röbbecke, Martina, Dagmar Simon, Martin Lengwiler and Clemens Kraetsch 2004. Inter-Disziplinieren. Erfolgsbedingungen von Forschungskooperationen. Berlin: Edition Sigma.
26. Shils, Edward 1982. Charisma, order, and status. In The Constitution of Society, ed. Edward Shils, pp. 119-142. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
27. Sismondo, Sergio 1999. Models, simulations, and their objects (Editor's Introduction). Science in Context, 12(2), 247-260.
28. Vierhaus, Rudolf 1996. Bemerkungen zum sogenannten Harnack-Prinzip. Mythos und Realität. In Die Kaiser-Wilhelm-/Max-Planck-Gesellschaft und ihre Institute Studien zu ihrer Geschichte: Das Harnack-Prinzip, eds. Bernhard vom Brocke and Hubert Laitko, pp. 129-138. Berlin: De Gruyter.
29. Weingart, Peter and Nico Stehr 2000. Introduction. In Practicing Interdisciplinarity, eds. Peter Weingart and Nico Stehr, pp. IX-XVI. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
30. Whitley, Richard 1984. The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences. Oxford: Clarendon Press.