Interdisziplinarity as a Form of Cooperation: The Debates Concerning the Epistemic State of Narratives as Exemplary Case (1970 - 1990)

作为一种合作形式的跨学科：以关于叙事认知状态的争论为例（1970-1990）

• 批准号: 431103346
• 负责人: Dr. Petra Boden
• 金额: --
• 依托单位国家: 德国
• 项目类别: Research Grants
• 资助国家: 德国
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/431103346?language=en
• 关键词: Interdisziplinarity; Form; Cooperation; Debates; Concerning

Since the 1950s there is an increasing amount of interdisciplinary forms of research in the historically orientated humanities ("Geisteswissenschaften") in Western Germany, which not only cooperate sporadically, but establish themselves institutionally. This project explores the personal, institutional und epistemological configurations within these groups as well as between them, in order to find out to what extent the process and the results of the respective research are coined by this setting.The project is based on the hypothesis that these forms of cooperation have not only begun to reflect upon and to solve common, already existing problems, but also that these questions were raised and encouraged within and as a result of the interdisciplinary discussion in the first place. Doing so new core themes were created, the methodological, theoretical and institutional norms of their treatment were framed, and finally new key paradigms of this period were established. Thematically, the hypothesis will be verified by examining the example of interdisciplinary debates concerning the epistemic state of narratives as a scientific practice in the "Geisteswissenschaften", which have begun to emerge since 1970 and were understood as part of the formation of a general theory of narration. Following the modernization and scientification of the "Geisteswissenschaften" the legitimacy of this traditional practice was questioned as not scientific, thus, a separate theoretical reflection was required. Therefore, the project will focus on forms of cooperation, in which literary scholars, historians and philosophers have come together since the beginning of the 1970s to reflect the problems theoretically as well as to elaborate on them practically. Hereby, literary studies are focussed, for in the course of their re-orientation these disciplines have most of all profited by these debates. It is extremely remarkable that these scholars have met repeatedly in preceding or simultaneously existing forms of cooperation and were therefore highly familiar with their mutual ways of thinking. The new groups were very often composed of similar personal combinations. Therefore, the question can be raised, to what kind of results the existing interrelations and overlappings within and between these cooperations with regards to the process and effects of their work finally led. The end of the period investigated around 1990 is justified by reasons of the history of institutions and theories as well as science policies.

自20世纪50年代以来，德国西部历史导向的人文学科（“Geisteswissenschaften”）中出现了越来越多的跨学科形式的研究，这些研究不仅零星地合作，而且在制度上建立起来。该项目探讨了这些群体内部以及群体之间的个人、制度和认识论配置，以便找出相应研究的过程和结果在多大程度上是由这种环境创造的。该项目基于以下假设：这些形式的合作不仅开始反思和解决共同的、已经存在的问题，而且这些问题首先是在跨学科讨论中提出和鼓励的。在此过程中，新的核心主题被创造出来，处理这些问题的方法论、理论和制度规范也被框架起来，并最终建立了这一时期新的关键范式。从主题上来说，这一假设将通过考察跨学科辩论的例子来验证，该辩论涉及叙事的认知状态作为“Geisteswissenschaften”中的一种科学实践，这些辩论自1970年开始出现，并被理解为一般理论形成的一部分。旁白。随着“Geisteswissenschaften”的现代化和科学化，这种传统实践的合法性被质疑为不科学，因此需要单独的理论反思。因此，该项目将侧重于合作形式，自20世纪70年代初以来，文学学者、历史学家和哲学家聚集在一起，从理论上反思问题，并在实践中对其进行阐述。由此，文学研究成为焦点，因为在重新定位的过程中，这些学科最受益于这些辩论。非常值得注意的是，这些学者在之前或同时存在的合作形式中多次见面，因此对彼此的思维方式非常熟悉。新团体通常由相似的个人组合组成。因此，我们不禁要问，这些合作内部和相互之间在工作过程和效果上存在的相互关系和重叠，最终导致了什么样的结果。 1990 年左右调查阶段的结束是由于制度和理论以及科学政策的历史原因而合理的。