Main page / "Knowledge. Understanding. Skill" Journal / Contents / 2010 / No. 3
Kiiashchenko L. P. Triple Helix of Transdisciplinarity in the Society of Knowledge
(Russian Scientific Fund for the Humanities)
Abstract Using the idea of the ethos of transdisciplinarity developed by Russian scientists, the author of the article discusses aprioristic and posteriori conditions of possibility of experience in trans-institutional interactions that have specific dynamic and axiologically structured organization (methodology and ethos).
Keywords: trans-institutionality, knowledge production, innovation, triple helix, triplex, ethos.
Kiiashchenko Larisa Pavlovna — a Doctor of Science (philosophy), the head of the Philosophy, Sociology, Politics, Law and Research-on-research Department of Russian Scientific Fund for the Humanities. E-mail: larisaki@rfh.ru
Citation: Kiiashchenko L. P. Triple Helix of Transdisciplinarity in the Society of Knowledge // Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie. 2010. № 3. S. 67–74.
RUSSIAN VERSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY (TRANSLITERATION)
Киященко, Л. П. (2005).Опыт философии трансдисциплинарности (казус «биоэтика») // Вопросы философии. № 8. С. 105–117.
Киященко, Л. П., Тищенко, П. Д. (2004) Философия трансдисциплинарности как опыт практического философствования // Практична философiя. Киев. № 2. С. 11–20; № 3. С. 179–198.
Мирская, Е. З. (2008) Этос науки: идеальные нормы и повседневные реалии // Этос науки. М. : Academia.
Мирский, Э. М., Барботько, Л. М., Войтов, В. А. (2008) Наука и бизнес. Этос фронтира // Этос науки. М. : Academia.
Хабермас, Ю. (2000) Моральное сознание и коммуникативное действие. СПб.
Этос науки (2008) М. : Academia.
Erno-Kjolhede, E. (2000) Scientific Norms as (Dis)integrators of Scientists? // MPP Working Paper. No. 14. URL: http://openarchive.cbs.dk/handle/10398/6394 (дата обращения: 15.08.2010).
Etzkowitz, H., Leydesdorff, L. (2000) The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and ‘‘Mode 2’’ to a Triple Helix of University — Industry — Government Relations // Research Policy. Vol. 29. P. 109–123.
Etzkowitz H., Zhou, Ch. (2007) Regional Innovation Initiator: The Entrepreneurial University in Various Triple Helix Models [Электронный ресурс] // Triple Helix 6. The Theme Paper of the 6th Biennial International Triple Helix Conference on University-Industry Government-Links “Emerging Models for the Entrepreneurial University: Regional Diversities or Global Convergence”. URL: http://www.nus.edu.sg/nec/TripleHelix6/SingaporeConferenceThemePaper050107.pdf (дата обращения: 16.08.2010).
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., Trow, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: the Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. L. : Sage.
King, L. Why is Separation of the Three Helices Important? [Эл. ресурс] // The Institute for Triple Helix Innovation. URL: http://www.triplehelixinstitute.org/?q=node/178 (дата обращения: 16.08.2010).
Lewontin, R. (2000) The Triple Helix: Gene, Organism, and Environment. Harvard University Press.
Merton, R. K. (1976) The Ambivalence of Scientists // Sociological Ambivalence and Other Essays. Ed. by R.K. Merton. N. Y. : The Free Press.
Nicolescu, B. (2007) Transdisciplinarity as Methodological Framework for Going Beyond the Science-Religion Debate // Transdisciplinarity in Science and Religion. No. 2. P. 35–60. URL: http://www.scribd.com/doc/17922521/Transdisciplinarity-in-Science-and-Religion-No-2-2007 (дата обращения: 16.08.2010).
Shinn, T (2002) The Triple Helix and New Production of Knowledge: Prepackaged Thinking on Science and Technology // Social Studies of Science. Vol. 32. Р. 599–614.
|
