Communism and the Incentive to Share in Science

Philosophy of Science 84 (4):698-716 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The communist norm requires that scientists widely share the results of their work. Where did this norm come from, and how does it persist? Michael Strevens provides a partial answer to these questions by showing that scientists should be willing to sign a social contract that mandates sharing. However, he also argues that it is not in an individual credit-maximizing scientist's interest to follow this norm. I argue against Strevens that individual scientists can rationally conform to the communist norm, even in the absence of a social contract or other ways of socially enforcing the norm, by proving results to this effect in a game-theoretic model. This shows that the incentives provided to scientists through the priority rule are sufficient to explain both the origins and the persistence of the communist norm, adding to previous results emphasizing the benefits of the incentive structure created by the priority rule.
Reprint years
2015, 2016, 2017
PhilPapers/Archive ID
HEECAT
Revision history
Archival date: 2017-09-19
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Is Peer Review a Good Idea?Heesen, Remco & Bright, Liam Kofi

View all 10 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index
2015-09-18

Total views
114 ( #23,480 of 41,458 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
19 ( #26,730 of 41,458 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.