1 / 19

Field Philosophy Reflections on Method and a Case Study in Peer Review 田野哲学 对其方法的反思与同行评议的案例分析

Field Philosophy Reflections on Method and a Case Study in Peer Review 田野哲学 对其方法的反思与同行评议的案例分析 J. Britt Holbrook 布里特 · 霍尔布鲁克 Department of Philosophy and Religion Studies Center for the Study of Interdisciplinarity University of North Texas 哲学与宗教学系 跨学科研究中心 北德克萨斯大学 May 21-23, 2012

mirra
Download Presentation

Field Philosophy Reflections on Method and a Case Study in Peer Review 田野哲学 对其方法的反思与同行评议的案例分析

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Field Philosophy Reflections on Method and a Case Study in Peer Review 田野哲学 对其方法的反思与同行评议的案例分析 J. Britt Holbrook 布里特·霍尔布鲁克 Department of Philosophy and Religion Studies Center for the Study of Interdisciplinarity University of North Texas 哲学与宗教学系 跨学科研究中心 北德克萨斯大学 May 21-23, 2012 Dalian University of Technology Dalian, China

  2. Field Philosophy • 田野哲学 • What is Field Philosophy? (Methodology) • 什么是田野哲学？（方法论） • The Comparative Assessment of Peer Review (CAPR) project • “同行评议的对比性评估”项目

  3. What is ‘Field Philosophy’? 什么是“田野哲学” Begin with a problem one finds in the world. 起始于现实世界中的某个问题

  4. What is ‘Field Philosophy’? Begin with a problem one finds in the world. Engage those who have the problem! 与那些具有该问题的人进行交流

  5. What is ‘Field Philosophy’? Begin with a problem one finds in the world. Engage those who have the problem! As far as possible, without prejudging the case, seek to uncover underlying philosophical issues, the discussion of which may help to reframe the problem in a way that helps (or even the solution to which may help solve the problem). 在预先不对它作出判断的情况下，尽可能力图发现潜于其中的哲学问题，对这些哲学问题的讨论将会以一种有益的方式来重新构造该问题（或者甚至对这些哲学问题的回答将有助于解决该问题）。

  6. What is ‘Field Philosophy’ not? “田野哲学”不是什么？

  7. What is ‘Field Philosophy’ not? Experimental Philosophy 实验哲学

  8. What is ‘Field Philosophy’ not? Experimental Philosophy X-phi focuses primarily on traditional philosophical questions (e.g., free will) and differs from traditional philosophy chiefly in terms of its methods. 实验哲学基本上还是关注传统的哲学问题（如自由意志），它与传统哲学的不同主要在于方法。

  9. What is ‘Field Philosophy’ not? Experimental Philosophy X-phi focuses primarily on traditional philosophical questions (e.g., free will) and differs from traditional philosophy chiefly in terms of its methods. X-phi uses empirical methods (e.g., surveys) to undertake experiments “conducted by a philosopher, as a philosopher, in order to produce a piece of . . . Philosophy” (Appiah, 2007). 实验哲学采用实证的方法（如调查）进行实验，“由哲学家——以哲学家的身份——来实施，为了能得到一些研究成果”（阿皮亚，2007）

  10. What is ‘Field Philosophy’ not? Applied Philosophy 应用哲学

  11. What is ‘Field Philosophy’ not? Applied Philosophy Applied Philosophy tends to put more emphasis on theory than on practice. 应用哲学倾向于把更多的精力放在理论上而非实践上。

  12. What is ‘Field Philosophy’ not? Applied Philosophy Applied Philosophy tends to put more emphasis on theory than on practice. The audience for Applied Philosophy is often other philosophers. 应用哲学的受众通常是其他的哲学家。

  13. What is ‘Field Philosophy’ not? Applied Philosophy Applied Philosophy tends to put more emphasis on theory than on practice. The audience for Applied Philosophy is often other philosophers. Even when the audience is practitioners (say scientists or policy makers in the case of environmental ethics), the rhetoric is still philosophical (for instance, arguments about intrinsic and instrumental value). 尽管当其受众是其他从业人员（如科学家或在环境伦理问题上的决策者）的时候，其表达方式依然是哲学式的（例如，对内在价值和工具价值的讨论）

  14. What is ‘Field Philosophy’ not? Applied Philosophy Applied Philosophy tends to put more emphasis on theory than on practice. The audience for Applied Philosophy is often other philosophers. Even when the audience is practitioners (say scientists or policy makers in the case of environmental ethics), the rhetoric is still philosophical (for instance, arguments about intrinsic and instrumental value). Applied Philosophy is subject to the same tests of rigor that apply to theoretical philosophy – only, perhaps, more so. 应用哲学要接受和理论哲学同样的严格性的检验——也许还要更加严格些。

  15. Comparative Assessment of Peer Review (CAPR) • 同行评议的对比性评估 • -Funded by NSF’s SciSIP program (2008-2012) • -由美国科学基金会‘科学与创新政策学’项目资助（2008-2012） • OSTP Director John Marburger’s 2005 call for a ‘science of science policy’ • 科学与技术政策局主任约翰·马伯格2005年呼吁建立“科学政策学” • SciSIP: ‘Science of Science and Innovation Policy’ (2007) • 科学与创新政策学（2007）

  16. Comparative Assessment of Peer Review (CAPR) 同行评议的对比性评估 -CAPR: examines peer review of grant proposals at 6 science agencies -CAPR：对六家科学机构在科学资助上的同行评议进行调查 • National Science Foundation（美国国家科学基金会） • National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration （美国国家海洋和大气管理局） • National Institutes of Health（美国国立卫生研究院） • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada（加拿大自然科学与工程研究委员会） • Dutch Technology Foundation (STW) （荷兰技术基金会） • European Commission Framework Programmes（欧盟委员会框架计划组）

  17. Comparative Assessment of Peer Review (CAPR) • -Funded by NSF’s SciSIP program (2008-2012) • OSTP Director John Marburger’s 2005 call for a ‘science of science policy’ • SciSIP: ‘Science of Science and Innovation Policy’ (2007) • -CAPR: examines peer review of grant proposals at 6 science agencies • National Science Foundation • National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration • National Institutes of Health • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada • Dutch Technology Foundation (STW) • European Commission Framework Programmes

  18. Comparative Assessment of Peer Review (CAPR) • Digital Repository: a collection of ~850 PR documents from/relating to each agency, plus more general materials • 数字文献：来自于每一个机构或与之相关的约850份同行评议文献，以及更多的普通材料 • Survey of stakeholders concerning the PR process • 对于同行评议过程有关的利益相关者的调查 • Workshops in the US, EU, and China on the changing nature of PR • 就同行评议的性质变化在美国、欧洲和中国召开的研讨会 • Publications in different venues, for a variety of audiences • 针对不同的受众在不同的地方发行的出版物

  19. CAPR Impacts, 2008-2011 Activities and ResultsCAPR的影响，2008-2011活动与结果 Activity 活动 Result 结果 Fall ’09: Special issue of Social Epistemology: US National Science Foundation’s Broader Impacts Criterion 2009年秋季，《社会认识论》专刊 “美国国家科学基金会的广泛影响标准” Aug ‘07: $25k NSF grant: “Making Sense of the ‘Broader Impacts’ of Science” 2007年8月：美国国家科学基金会资助2.5万美元：“理解科学的 ‘广泛影响’” April ‘08: brief NSF Staff writing report to Congress on Broader Impacts. 2008年4月：国家科学基金会工作人员向国会提交的关于广泛影响的简要书面报告。 April ‘10: NSB Merit Review Task Force buys 25 copies of Social Epistemology Special Issue 2010年4月，美国国家科学委员会价值评估特别小组购买了25份《社会认识论》专刊 Dec ‘10: Tornow attends Brussels EC workshop on “Peer Review & Broader Impacts” 2010年12月：Tornow参加在布鲁塞尔举行的研讨会“同行评议和广泛影响” July, ’10: meet with NSB Merit Review Task Force Exec. Sec. Tornow 2010年7月：与美国国家科学委员会价值评估特别小组执行秘书Tornow会见 Aug ‘10: Lipinski’s report language for America COMPETES Reauthorization Act uses recommendations. 2010年8月：利平斯基关于《美国竞争再授权法》的报告中采纳了我们的建议 April ‘10: meetiwith John Veysey, Asst to Rep Lipinski (D-IL) 2010年4月：与约翰·维齐（丹尼尔·利平斯基代表的助理）会见 Science Progress article June 27, 2011 and letter in Science, July 8 argue against ‘national goals’ list 2011年6月27号科学进步上的文章和发表在7月8号科学上的信反对“国家目标”条款 Dec, ‘11 NSB/MR 11-22: “NSF’s Merit Review Criteria: Review and Revisions,” ‘national goals’ list dropped 2011年12月，美国科学委员会价值评估11-12，“国家科学基金会的价值评估标准：评论与修订”‘国家目标’条款被删除

More Related