Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Psychoanalysis of technoscience: symbolisation and imagination.Hub Zwart - 2019 - Berlin / Münster / Zürich: LIT.
    This volume aims to develop a philosophical diagnostic of the present, focussing on contemporary technoscience. psychoanalysis submits contemporary technoscientific discourse to a symptomatic reading, analysing it with evenly-poised attention and from an oblique perspective. Psychoanalysis is not primarily interested in protons, genes or galaxies, but rather in the ways in which they are disclosed and discussed, focussing on the symptomatic terms, the metaphors and paradoxes at work in technoscientific discourse. This monograph presents a psychoanalytical assessment of technoscience. The first four (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Fabricated Truths and the Pathos of Proximity: What Would be a Nietzschean Philosophy of Contemporary Technoscience?Hub Zwart - 2019 - Foundations of Science 24 (3):457-482.
    In recent years, Nietzsche’s views on (natural) science attracted a considerable amount of scholarly attention. Overall, his attitude towards science tends to be one of suspicion, or ambivalence at least. My article addresses the “Nietzsche and science” theme from a slightly different perspective, raising a somewhat different type of question, more pragmatic if you like, namely: how to be a Nietzschean philosopher of science today? What would the methodological contours of a Nietzschean approach to present-day research areas (such as neuroscience, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The oblique perspective: philosophical diagnostics of contemporary life sciences research.Hub Zwart - 2017 - Life Sciences, Society and Policy 13 (1):1-20.
    This paper indicates how continental philosophy may contribute to a diagnostics of contemporary life sciences research, as part of a “diagnostics of the present”. First, I describe various options for an oblique reading of emerging scientific discourse, bent on uncovering the basic “philosophemes” of science. Subsequently, I outline a number of radical transformations occurring both at the object-pole and at the subject-pole of the current knowledge relationship, namely the technification of the object and the anonymisation or collectivisation of the subject, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Anmerkungen zur wissenschaftshistorischen Nobelpreisforschung.Nils Hansson - 2018 - Berichte Zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte 41 (1):7-18.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Science as a Collective Effort: Collaboration at the Zoophysiological Laboratory 1911–1945.Allan Lyngs - 2024 - Perspectives on Science 32 (2):141-183.
    This paper will address scientific collaboration at the Zoophysiological Laboratory during the 1911–1945 directorship of Nobel Prize winner August Krogh. Using authorship information and acknowledgments from the laboratory’s publications, this paper maps the many researchers involved in the work. In total, 193 different people contributed to the work at the Zoophysiological Laboratory. The paper further analyzes what labor, materials, ideas, and knowledge were exchanged between the individuals in the laboratory. While science has become more collaborative throughout the twentieth century, this (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • „Prisvärdig“ Forschung? Wilhelm Roux und sein Programm der Entwicklungsmechanik.Thorsten Halling, Nils Hansson & Heiner Fangerau - 2018 - Berichte Zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte 41 (1):73-97.
    “Prizeworthy Research?” Wilhelm Roux and His Program of Developmental Mechanics. The Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine is awarded annually to a maximum of three laureates. Not surprisingly, the number of nominees is much larger. Drawing on Nobel Prize nominations in the Nobel archives in Sweden, the core of this paper deals with the nomination letters for the physiologist Wilhelm Roux to discuss competition and some controversies among German physiologists around 1900 in this particular context. The paper elucidates the arguments (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark