PL
 |
EN
Ten serwis zostanie wyłączony 2025-02-11.
Nowa wersja platformy, zawierająca wyłącznie zasoby pełnotekstowe, jest już dostępna.
Przejdź na https://bibliotekanauki.pl
Ograniczanie wyników
Czasopisma help
  1. 2 Avant
Lata help
  1. 2 2017
Autorzy help
  1. 2 Drayson H.
Preferencje help
Polish version English version Język
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników

Znaleziono wyników: 2

Liczba wyników na stronie
first rewind previous Strona / 1 next fast forward last
Wyniki wyszukiwania
help Sortuj według:

help Ogranicz wyniki do:
first rewind previous Strona / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote Academic Carelessness, Bootstrapping, and the Cybernetic Investigator
100%
Drayson H.
Avant
|
2017
|
tom 8
EN
The following discussion is concerned with certain forms of poor practice in academic publishing that give rise to “academic urban legends.” It suggests that rather than simply consider phenomena such as poor citation practices and circular reporting as mistakes, misunderstandings, and evidence of lack of rigor, we might also read them as evidence of a particular kind of creativity-for which misunderstandings, assumptions, and failures of diligence are mechanisms by which potentially influential ideas manifest. Reflecting particularly on a critique of the debate surrounding pharmaceutical cognitive enhancement and its use by university staff and students, the following will argue that investigators within the disciplines concerned with the effects or development of these technologies are themselves implicated as potential subjects. Alongside reflections from science fiction studies that offer insights into the experiential dimension of reading and misreading, this paper offers some insights regarding how we might think of mistakes and misunderstandings as a form of bootstrapping and a source of creativity in scientific and technological development.
2
Content available Academic Carelessness, Bootstrapping, and the Cybernetic Investigator
100%
Drayson H.
Avant
|
2017
|
nr 8
EN
The following discussion is concerned with certain forms of poor practice in academic publishing that give rise to “academic urban legends.” It suggests that rather than simply consider phenomena such as poor citation practices and circular reporting as mistakes, misunderstandings, and evidence of lack of rigor, we might also read them as evidence of a particular kind of creativity-for which misunderstandings, assumptions, and failures of diligence are mechanisms by which potentially influential ideas manifest. Reflecting particularly on a critique of the debate surrounding pharmaceutical cognitive enhancement and its use by university staff and students, the following will argue that investigators within the disciplines concerned with the effects or development of these technologies are themselves implicated as potential subjects. Alongside reflections from science fiction studies that offer insights into the experiential dimension of reading and misreading, this paper offers some insights regarding how we might think of mistakes and misunderstandings as a form of bootstrapping and a source of creativity in scientific and technological development.
first rewind previous Strona / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.