Scientific Sharing, Communism, and the Social Contract

In Thomas Boyer-Kassem, Conor Mayo-Wilson & Michael Weisberg (eds.), Scientific Collaboration and Collective Knowledge. New York, USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 3--33 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Research programs regularly compete to achieve the same goal, such as the discovery of the structure of DNA or the construction of a TEA laser. The more the competing programs share information, the faster the goal is likely to be reached, to society's benefit. But the "priority rule"—the scientific norm mandating that the first program to reach the goal in question receive all the credit for the achievement—provides a powerful disincentive for programs to share information. How, then, is the clash between social and self interest resolved in scientific practice? This paper investigates what Robert Merton called science's "communist" norm, which mandates universal sharing of knowledge, and uses mathematical models of discovery to argue that a communist regime may be on the whole advantageous and fair to all parties, and so might be implemented by a social contract that all scientists would be willing to sign.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,440

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Qualities of sharing and their transformations in the digital age.Andreas Wittel - 2011 - International Review of Information Ethics 15 (9):2011.
Science and the Social Contract in Renouvier.Warren Schmaus - 2011 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 1 (1):73-100.
Openness in the social sciences: Sharing data.Joan E. Sieber - 1991 - Ethics and Behavior 1 (2):69 – 86.
Psychological Contracts.Jeffery A. Thompson & David W. Hart - 2005 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 16:38-43.
Social contracts and corporations: A reply to Hodapp. [REVIEW]Thomas Donaldson - 1990 - Journal of Business Ethics 9 (2):133 - 137.
Comment on Munoz-dardé's'liberty's chains'.Niko Kolodny - 2009 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 83 (1):197-212.
Contract Law and Reasons of Social Justice.E. Voyiakis - 2012 - Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 25 (2):393-416.
Some philosophical and methodological problems of the scientific and technological revolution: lecture.Liliana Alexandrova (ed.) - 1982 - Sofia: Academy of Social Sciences and Social Management at the C.C. of the B.C.P..

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-09-07

Downloads
50 (#312,878)

6 months
9 (#294,961)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Michael Strevens
New York University

Citations of this work

Is Peer Review a Good Idea?Remco Heesen & Liam Kofi Bright - 2021 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 72 (3):635-663.
Epistemic Advantage on the Margin: A Network Standpoint Epistemology.Jingyi Wu - 2022 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (3):1-23.
Communism and the Incentive to Share in Science.Remco Heesen - 2017 - Philosophy of Science 84 (4):698-716.
To Be Scientific Is To Be Communist.Liam Kofi Bright & Remco Heesen - 2023 - Social Epistemology 37 (3):249-258.

View all 17 citations / Add more citations