Interdisciplinarity and peirce's classification of the sciences

A centennial reassessment

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper discusses the American scientist and philosopher Charles S. Peirce's (1839-1914) classification of the sciences from the contemporary perspective of interdisciplinary studies. Three theses are defended: (1) Studies on interdisciplinarity pertain to the intermediate class of Peirce's classification of all science, the sciences of review (retrospective science), ranking below the sciences of discovery (heuretic sciences) and above practical science (the arts). (2) Scientific research methods adopted by interdisciplinary inquiries are cross-categorial. Making them converge to an increasing extent with the sciences of discovery, especially the methodeutic of normative logic, is one of the future challenges for studies on interdisciplinarity. (3) The overall structure of Peirce's classification, were it to be applied in today's situation, would not, in any major respect, be radically different from what it was designed to reflect a hundred years ago, in spite of the virtually exponential creation and production of new domains and the massive increase in investment in research and scientific publication. Accordingly, charges that the sciences of discovery are becoming ever more fragmented are not new.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)127-152
Number of pages26
JournalPerspectives on Science
Volume14
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Interdisciplinarity
Centennial
Art
Research Methods
Interdisciplinary Studies
Charles Sanders Peirce
Ranking
Philosopher
Scientific Publications
Logic
Intermediate

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General
  • History and Philosophy of Science

Cite this

Interdisciplinarity and peirce's classification of the sciences : A centennial reassessment. / Pietarinen, Ahti Veikko.

In: Perspectives on Science, Vol. 14, No. 2, 01.06.2006, p. 127-152.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{5ba66878eafc425c858fe59f00049912,
title = "Interdisciplinarity and peirce's classification of the sciences: A centennial reassessment",
abstract = "This paper discusses the American scientist and philosopher Charles S. Peirce's (1839-1914) classification of the sciences from the contemporary perspective of interdisciplinary studies. Three theses are defended: (1) Studies on interdisciplinarity pertain to the intermediate class of Peirce's classification of all science, the sciences of review (retrospective science), ranking below the sciences of discovery (heuretic sciences) and above practical science (the arts). (2) Scientific research methods adopted by interdisciplinary inquiries are cross-categorial. Making them converge to an increasing extent with the sciences of discovery, especially the methodeutic of normative logic, is one of the future challenges for studies on interdisciplinarity. (3) The overall structure of Peirce's classification, were it to be applied in today's situation, would not, in any major respect, be radically different from what it was designed to reflect a hundred years ago, in spite of the virtually exponential creation and production of new domains and the massive increase in investment in research and scientific publication. Accordingly, charges that the sciences of discovery are becoming ever more fragmented are not new.",
author = "Pietarinen, {Ahti Veikko}",
year = "2006",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1162/posc.2006.14.2.127",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "127--152",
journal = "Perspectives on Science",
issn = "1063-6145",
publisher = "University of Chicago",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interdisciplinarity and peirce's classification of the sciences

T2 - A centennial reassessment

AU - Pietarinen, Ahti Veikko

PY - 2006/6/1

Y1 - 2006/6/1

N2 - This paper discusses the American scientist and philosopher Charles S. Peirce's (1839-1914) classification of the sciences from the contemporary perspective of interdisciplinary studies. Three theses are defended: (1) Studies on interdisciplinarity pertain to the intermediate class of Peirce's classification of all science, the sciences of review (retrospective science), ranking below the sciences of discovery (heuretic sciences) and above practical science (the arts). (2) Scientific research methods adopted by interdisciplinary inquiries are cross-categorial. Making them converge to an increasing extent with the sciences of discovery, especially the methodeutic of normative logic, is one of the future challenges for studies on interdisciplinarity. (3) The overall structure of Peirce's classification, were it to be applied in today's situation, would not, in any major respect, be radically different from what it was designed to reflect a hundred years ago, in spite of the virtually exponential creation and production of new domains and the massive increase in investment in research and scientific publication. Accordingly, charges that the sciences of discovery are becoming ever more fragmented are not new.

AB - This paper discusses the American scientist and philosopher Charles S. Peirce's (1839-1914) classification of the sciences from the contemporary perspective of interdisciplinary studies. Three theses are defended: (1) Studies on interdisciplinarity pertain to the intermediate class of Peirce's classification of all science, the sciences of review (retrospective science), ranking below the sciences of discovery (heuretic sciences) and above practical science (the arts). (2) Scientific research methods adopted by interdisciplinary inquiries are cross-categorial. Making them converge to an increasing extent with the sciences of discovery, especially the methodeutic of normative logic, is one of the future challenges for studies on interdisciplinarity. (3) The overall structure of Peirce's classification, were it to be applied in today's situation, would not, in any major respect, be radically different from what it was designed to reflect a hundred years ago, in spite of the virtually exponential creation and production of new domains and the massive increase in investment in research and scientific publication. Accordingly, charges that the sciences of discovery are becoming ever more fragmented are not new.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79954709224&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79954709224&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1162/posc.2006.14.2.127

DO - 10.1162/posc.2006.14.2.127

M3 - Review article

VL - 14

SP - 127

EP - 152

JO - Perspectives on Science

JF - Perspectives on Science

SN - 1063-6145

IS - 2

ER -