Hyperprofessionalism and the Crisis of Readership in the History of Science

Isis 96 (2):238-243 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There is a crisis of readership for work in our field, as in many other academic disciplines. One of its causes is a pathological form of the professionalism that we so greatly value. “Hyperprofessionalism” is a disease whose symptoms include self‐referentiality, self‐absorption, and a narrowing of intellectual focus. This essay describes some features and consequences of hyperprofessionalism in the history of science and offers a modest suggestion for a possible cure

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 102,394

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-01-31

Downloads
55 (#401,632)

6 months
14 (#225,774)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

“Hungry for Knowledge”: Towards a Meso‐History of the Environmental Sciences.Nils Güttler - 2019 - Berichte Zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte 42 (2-3):235-258.
Layered history: Styles of reasoning as stratified conditions of possibility.James Elwick - 2012 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43 (4):619-627.
Microstudies versus big picture accounts?Soraya de Chadarevian - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 40 (1):13-19.

View all 22 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references