EPISTEMIC DISUNITY OF EXPERIMENTATION IN MEGASCIENCE AND APPROACHES TO ITS SURMOUNTING

Publication Type:

Language:

Transliteration of original Title: 
Epistemicheskaya razobshchennost' eksperimentirovaniya v meganauke i podkhody k ee preodoleniyu
Author(s): 
Vitaly Pronskikh
Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna; Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, USA
Issue number: 
No. 1 (Vol. 43)
Pages: 
207-222
Abstract: 

I consider influence of non-epistemic factors on development of experimental research in Big Science and megascience taking high-energy physics as an example. Stratification of the scientific community to theorists, experimentalists, and instrumentalists in megascience is further analyzed. Examples of competition between experimentalists for limited resources (beam time, buildings), when they strived for re-using their old detectors, which considerably limited their epistemic scopes is discussed. Is it shown that one of the reasons of such competition is the rise of boundary objects in the structure of a scientific experiment as well as related epistemic privileges of certain scientific communities. Approaches to building of a role model of the postmodern experimental community grounded in the epistemic unity of the community based on the interactional expertise are suggested.

Keywords: 
philosophy of scientific experimentation, Big Science, megascience, boundary object, interactional expertise; high-energy physics
References: 

Anderson , Epistemic Justice as a Virtue of Social Institutions, Social Epistemology Vol. 26, No. 2, April 2012, pp. 163–173.

Bodnarczuk E.M., Hoddeson L., Megascience in Particle Physics: The Birth of an Experiment String at Fermilab, Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences, 2008, Vol. 38, Number 4, pp. 508–534.

Collins H. Interactional Expertise as a Third Kind of Knowledge, Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 3 (2), 2004, pp. 125-143.

Collins H., Evans R., Gorman M. Trading zones and interactional expertise, Trading zones and interactional expertise: creating new kind of collaboration / edited by M.Gorman, Massachusets Institute of Technology, 2010, 297 p.

Galison P. How experiments end, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1987, 330 p.

Galison P. Image and logic: a material culture of microphysics, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1997, 955 p.

Hoddeson L., Kolb A.W., and Westfall C. Fermilab. Physics, the Frontier, and Megascience. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. 2008. 497 p.

Lipkin A.I., Pronskikh V.S. Theoretical components in experiment at accelerators of elementary particles (Teoreticheskie komponenty v eksperimentakh na uskoritelyakh elementarnykh chastits). Vestnik Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Filosofiya – Bulletin of PFUR (Philosophy), 2010, no.3, pp. 56-63.

Pronskikh V.S. Krosskul'turnaya kommunikatsiya v sovremennoy nauke (na primere fiziki vysokikh energiy) (Cross-cultural communication in contemporary science (using high-energy physics as an example)), Dubna: Dubna University, 2012, p. 127.

Pronskikh V.S. Nauchnyy eksperiment kak prostranstvo vzaimodeystviya kul'tur (Scientific experiment as a zone of cultural interactions). Dubna: Dubna University, 2013, p. 154.

Pronskikh V.S. Podkhody k obosnovaniyu meganauki kak sposoba organizatsii issledovaniy v rossiyskoy nauke (Approaches to substantiation of megascience as a way of organizing of research in the Russian science). Dubna: Dubna University, 2014, p.171.

Star S.L., Griesemer J.R. Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of vertebrate zoology, Soc. Stud. Sci. 19, 1989,  pp. 387-420.

Weinberg, A. M. Impact of Large-Scale Science on the United States, Science, 1961, V. 134, N. 3473, pp. 161-164.

DOI: 
10.5840/eps201543141
Full Text: