Copenhagen Business School: CBS Open Journals

    Kritikkens nødvendighed eller det venligt fjendtlige samarbejde mellem forskerne

    Get PDF
    Universiteterne er i krise og har været under pres udefra i mange år. Denne artikel behandler det interne pres på universiteterne. Forskerne selv blokerer den faglige kritik, livsnerven i det videnskabelige arbejde. Den populære socialkonstruktivistiske relativisme har udviklet sig til en ekstrem udgave af tidligere tiders herskende akademiske mantra – hvis du lader mig i fred, forstyrrer jeg ikke din niche. For at komme ud af dødvandet genintroduceres Karl Poppers berømte udtryk Det Venligt-fjendtlige Samarbejde mellem Forskerne. Det drejer sig om de grundlæggende sociale relationer i forskningen, der hele tiden truer med at blive nedbrudt til alene at være almindeligt lønarbejde, hvor kritik tolkes som mangel på solidaritet, og den udeblevne faglige kritik udtrykker en vellykket konkurrencebegrænsning. Med udgangspunkt i Umberto Ecos selvkritiske udsagn om, at der er grænser for fortolkning, diskuteres Poppers begreb om videnskabelighed og objektivitet som sociologiske begreber. Her spiller den permanente faglige kritik og Den kritiske holdning den centrale rolle, og det vises gennem en diskussion af kritikken af Popper, at den “normalvidenskabelige“ afvisning af Popper som falsifikationist og empirist er forfejlet. Udviklingen af Poppers kritikbegreb benyttes til at undersøge mulighederne for et opgør med de sidste årtiers socialkonstruktivistisk fornufts- og oplysningskritik og for at etablere (institutionalisere) kritikken som afgørende for universiteternes eksistens. ENGELSK ABSTRACT: Nils Bredsdorff: The Necessity of Criticism or The Friendly-Hostile Cooperation Between Scientists This article deals with the internal pressure in universities, in that scientists themselves block scientific criticism. The widespread relativism of social constructivism has developed into an extreme version of the previously prevailing mantra of academia – if you leave me alone, I promise not to interfere in your niche. To get out of this dilemma, the author reintroduces Popper’s famous expression: The friendly-hostile cooperation between scientists. It concerns basic social relations within research. These relations are constantly under pressure and might disintegrate into ordinary wage labour, a kind of wage labour in which criticism is understood as lack of solidarity, and the absence of scientific criticism is seen as a result of successful restriction on competition. The article starts with Umberto Eco’s self-critical statement that there are limits to interpretation, and then addresses Popper’s concept of science and objectivity as sociological terms under discussion. In Popper’s concept, permanent scientific criticism by peers and The Critical Attitude are the crux of the matter. It is argued that the “normal scientific“ rejection of Popper for being a “falsificationist“ and an empiricist is wrong. Popper’s concept of criticism is employed to examine the possibilities of a showdown with the recent decades of social constructivist criticism of reason and enlightenment, and to establish (institutionalized) criticism as a decisive factor for the survival of the universities. Key words: Karl Popper, criticism, epistemology, critical attitude, social constructivism

    Hvad er egentlig et bibliotek, Mette Bock?

    No full text

    Tvivlsomme tidsskrifter – bibliotekernes rolle

    Get PDF
    Input fra en temadag om Predatory Journal

    DEFF-projekt afdækker videndeling på uddannelsesinstitutionerne

    Get PDF
    Videndeling på de danske uddannelsesinstitutioner svigter. Det er svært og kompliceret at dele læringsmaterialer undervisere imellem, og det koster både tid og penge. Første fase af et netop afsluttet projekt ser på, hvordan et læringsrepositorie kan se ud

    Lisa Nakamura's Digitizing Race: Visual Cultures of the internet

    No full text

    A Bibliography of Scandinavian Languages and Linguistics 1900-1970

    Get PDF

    Genealogies of Disability in Global Governance: A Foucauldian Critique of Disability and Development

    Get PDF
    In this article, I engage with the ways in which disability is governed within the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) (United Nations 2000). Using a Foucauldian perspective on the governing of populations in modern states (Foucault 1991), I problematise this politics of disability and development by interrogating the ways in which biopower, through the constructions of modern development frameworks, has shaped our understanding of disability and impairment. I pursue this historical trajectory by tracing the emergence of the Global Burden of Diseases (GBD), a global study developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Bank in the 1990s (Murray and Lopez 1996). The forms of knowledge emerging in these global frameworks shed light on genealogies of disability in the twenty-first century. By re-visiting a postcolonial critique of Foucault’s conception of power in the context of Third World’s struggles for liberation (Said 1986), I suggest that a Foucauldian critique in disability and development could be deepened through its engagement with postcolonial studies. A critical and genealogical perspective on disability and development, I argue, is useful for understanding the government of disability and impairment in the intersections of global and local histories
    Copenhagen Business School: CBS Open Journalsis based in DK
    Do you manage Copenhagen Business School: CBS Open Journals? Access insider analytics, issue reports and manage access to outputs from your repository in the CORE Dashboard!