Titlebook: A Social Epistemology of Research Groups; Susann Wagenknecht Book 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016 Philosophy of

PLY

書目名稱A Social Epistemology of Research Groups影響因子(影響力)




書目名稱A Social Epistemology of Research Groups影響因子(影響力)學科排名




書目名稱A Social Epistemology of Research Groups網(wǎng)絡公開度




書目名稱A Social Epistemology of Research Groups網(wǎng)絡公開度學科排名




書目名稱A Social Epistemology of Research Groups被引頻次




書目名稱A Social Epistemology of Research Groups被引頻次學科排名




書目名稱A Social Epistemology of Research Groups年度引用




書目名稱A Social Epistemology of Research Groups年度引用學科排名




書目名稱A Social Epistemology of Research Groups讀者反饋




書目名稱A Social Epistemology of Research Groups讀者反饋學科排名

eucalyptus

外向者

Book 2016ook includes field observations and interviews with scientists to present an empirically-grounded perspective on much-debated questions concerning research groups’ division of labor, relations of epistemic dependence and trust..

locus-ceruleus

OFF

2947-6828 to integrating philosophical analysis with first-hand quali.This book investigates how collaborative scientific practice yields scientific knowledge. At a time when most of today’s scientific knowledge is created in research groups, the author reconsiders the social character of science to address

協(xié)迫

Komplexe Zahlen und Funktionen,temological approach to the division of labor in groups need to take into account? To answer these two questions, I begin by revisiting social epistemology’s existing discussion about the division of labor in science, a discussion primarily focused on scientific peer communities (Sect.?.).

裙帶關系

Vektoralgebra und analytische Geometrie,to be domain-specific. After all, what applies to interactions between children or friends in non-professional everyday life need not apply to the professional interaction between scientists who collaborate to create scientific knowledge.

optic-nerve

Book 2016ted in research groups, the author reconsiders the social character of science to address the question of whether collaboratively created knowledge should be considered as collective achievement, and if so, in which sense. Combining philosophical analysis with qualitative empirical inquiry, this boo

Spangle

milligram

Komplexe Zahlen und Funktionen,p members, following them through their professional days. When I had familiarized myself with the group, I set out to interview the five scientists that formed the group’s core at the time of my investigation.