The Goals and Conditions of Successful Interdisciplinarity. Some Critical Guidelines in Planning, Managing and Evaluating Interdisciplinary Projects

Journal title PARADIGMI
Author/s Rossana Brambilla, Emanuele Serrelli
Publishing Year 2016 Issue 2016/2
Language English Pages 69 P. 151-169 File size 197 KB
DOI 10.3280/PARA2016-002012
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

In questa analisi concettuale sosteniamo la necessità di riflettere maggiormente sugli obiettivi e sulle condizioni dell’interdisciplinarità. Il "surplus di conoscenza" che da essa è atteso dovrebbe essere inteso come produzione di nuovi modi di pensare che lasciano tracce risconoscibili nelle discipline coinvolte. Nel pianificare e valutare progetti interdisciplinari sono importanti specifiche condizioni abilitanti: un oggetto, un obiettivo, pratiche di condivisione e la capacità dei ricercatori di adottare determinati atteggiamenti sistematicamente e con convinzione. La finalità ultima dell’interdisciplinarità - trasformare società e cultura - si lega al significato e agli effetti della ricerca, nonché al posto della scienza nella società.

Keywords: Education, Interdisciplinarity, Pedagogy, Philosophy of science, Research, Social organization of knowledge.

  1. Adorno Th.W. (1973). Philosophische Frühschriften. In: Tiedemann R., Hrsg. Gesammelte Schriften. Bd. 1. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp: 325-371.
  2. Althusser L., Balibar E. (1965). Lire le Capital. Paris: Maspéro.
  3. Althusser L. (1965). Pour Marx. Paris: Maspéro.
  4. Bellone E. (2008). Molte nature. Saggio sull’evoluzione culturale. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.
  5. Brambilla R. (2009). La differenza pedagogica. Consistenza e funzionamento del “campo” educativo. Università degli Studi di Milano Bicocca: Tesi di Dottorato in Scienze Umane.
  6. Brambilla R. (2012). Critica della pedagogia e teoria critica dell’educazione. Costruzioni Psicoanalitiche, 23: 105-120.
  7. Brambilla R., Businaro N., Datteri E., Malatesta S., Mangiatordi A., Vitale A., eds. (2012). Giornate di dialogo dei dottorandi I edizione – 4-5 Giugno 2012.
  8. Milano: Dipartimento di Scienze Umane per la Formazione “Riccardo Massa”, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, http://hdl.handle.net/10281/46786.
  9. Boumans M., Chang H., Ankeny R., eds. (2011). Philosophy of Science in Practice. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 1, 3.
  10. Lazazzara A., Oggionni F., Ornaghi V., Pezzotti A., Serrelli E., eds. (2013). Giornate di dialogo dei dottorandi II edizione – 24 Maggio 2013. Milano: Dipartimento di Scienze Umane per la Formazione “Riccardo Massa”, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, http://hdl.handle.net/10281/46753 Cambrosio A., Keating P. (1983). The disciplinary stake: the case of chronobiology. Social Studies of Science, 13: 325-353, DOI: 10.1177/030631283013003001
  11. Hoskin K.W. (1993). Education and the genesis of disciplinarity: the unexpected reversal. In: Messer-Davidow E., Shumway D.R., Sylvan D.J., eds.
  12. Knowledges: Historical and Critical Studies in Disciplinarity. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia: 271-305.
  13. Dupré J. (2001). Human Nature and the Limits of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  14. Foucault M. (1961). Folie et déraison: histoire de la folie à l’âge classique. Paris: Plon.
  15. Foucault M. (1975). Surveiller et punir: naissance de la prison. Paris: Gallimard. Foucault M. (1994a). Sur l’archéologie des sciences. Réponse au Cercle d’Épistemologie (1968). Paris: Gallimard.
  16. Foucault M. (1994b). Réponse à une question (1968). Paris: Gallimard.
  17. Gibbons M., Limoges C., Nowotny H., Schwartzman S., Scott P., Trow M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge: the Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage.
  18. Giere R. (2006). Scientific Perspectivism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  19. Good B.J. (1994). Medicine, Rationality and Experience: An Anthropological Perspective. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
  20. Gould S.J. (1977). Ontogeny and Phylogeny. New York: Belknap Harvard.
  21. Griffiths P.E., Stotz K. (2013). Genetics and Philosophy: An Introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  22. Horkheimer M. (1968). Traditionelle und kritische Theorie. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Verlag.
  23. Horkheimer M., Marcuse H. (1965). Philosophie und kritische Theorie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.
  24. Ingold T. (2007). The trouble with “evolutionary biology”. Anthropology Today, 23, 2: 13-17,
  25. Pina M., Gontier N., eds. (2014). The evolution of social communication in primates: a multidisciplinary approach. Dordrecht: Spinger.
  26. Mendoza Straffon L., ed. (2016). Cultural phylogenetics: concepts and applications in archaeology. Dordrecht: Springer, in preparation.
  27. Mesoudi A., Whiten A., Laland K.N. (2006). Towards a unified science of cultural evolution. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29: 329-383,
  28. Montessori M. (1909). Il Metodo della Pedagogia Scientifica applicato all’educazione infantile nelle Case dei Bambini. Roma: Edizioni Opera Nazionale Montessori.
  29. Müller G.B. (2007). EvoDevo: Extending the evolutionary synthesis. Nature Reviews Genetics, 8: 943-949.
  30. Okasha S. (2002). Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  31. Panebianco F., Serrelli E., eds. (2016). Understanding cultural traits. A multidisciplinary perspective on cultural diversity. Dordrecht: Springer. Pierce S.J. (1991). Subject areas, disciplines and the concept of authority. Library and Information Science Research, 13: 21-35.
  32. Pigliucci M. (2007). Do we need an extended evolutionary synthesis? Evolution, 61, 12: 2743-2749,
  33. Pigliucci M., Müller G., eds. (2010). Evolution: The Extended Synthesis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  34. Pina M., Gontier N., eds. (2014). The evolution of social communication in primates: a multidisciplinary approach. Dordrecht: Spinger, in preparation.
  35. Pombo O. (2004). Interdisciplinaridade: Ambições e Limites. Lisboa: Relógio d’Água.
  36. Serrelli E. (2014). Stephen Jay Gould, Pere Alberch e il modello-orologio dell’eterocronia: incontro e divergenza alle origini di evo-devo. Caianiello S, ed. Da Gould a evo-devo. Percorsi storici e teorici. Roma: CNR Edizioni, pp. 97-128.
  37. Serrelli E. (2016). Evolutionary genetics and cultural traits in a ‘body of theory’ perspective. In Panebianco F, Serrelli E, eds. Understanding cultural traits. A multidisciplinary perspective on cultural diversity. Springer, Switzerland, Chapter 11.
  38. Serrelli E., Gontier N., eds. (2015), Macroevolution: explanation, interpretation, evidence. Dordrecht: Springer.
  39. Stichweh R. (1996). Science in the system of world society. Social Science Information, 35: 327-340,
  40. Stichweh R. (2001). Scientific disciplines, history of. In: Smelser N.J., Baltes P.B., eds. International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Oxford: Elsevier Science: 13727-13731.
  41. Stichweh R. (2003). Differentiation of scientific disciplines: causes and consequences. In: Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS). Paris: UNESCO.
  42. Terzani T. (2004). Un altro giro di giostra. Viaggio nel male e nel bene del nostro tempo. Milano: Longanesi.
  43. Tomasi di Lampedusa G. (1958). Il Gattopardo. Milano: Feltrinelli.
  44. van Fraassen B.C. (2008). Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  45. Wilson D. et al. (2012). Uncomfortable truth: an ecologist in the genetics lab. The Conversation, http://theconversation.edu.au, 10 May 2012.
  46. Adorno Th.W. (1973). Philosophische Frühschriften. In: Tiedemann R., Hrsg. Gesammelte Schriften. Bd. 1. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp: 325-371.
  47. Althusser L., Balibar E. (1965). Lire le Capital. Paris: Maspéro.
  48. Althusser L. (1965). Pour Marx. Paris: Maspéro.
  49. Bellone E. (2008). Molte nature. Saggio sull’evoluzione culturale. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.
  50. Brambilla R. (2009). La differenza pedagogica. Consistenza e funzionamento del “campo” educativo. Università degli Studi di Milano Bicocca: Tesi di Dottorato in Scienze Umane.
  51. Brambilla R. (2012). Critica della pedagogia e teoria critica dell’educazione. Costruzioni Psicoanalitiche, 23: 105-120.
  52. Brambilla R., Businaro N., Datteri E., Malatesta S., Mangiatordi A., Vitale A., eds. (2012). Giornate di dialogo dei dottorandi I edizione – 4-5 Giugno 2012. Milano: Dipartimento di Scienze Umane per la Formazione “Riccardo Massa”, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, http://hdl.handle.net/10281/46786.
  53. Boumans M., Chang H., Ankeny R., eds. (2011). Philosophy of Science in Practice. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 1, 3.
  54. Lazazzara A., Oggionni F., Ornaghi V., Pezzotti A., Serrelli E., eds. (2013). Giornate di dialogo dei dottorandi II edizione – 24 Maggio 2013. Milano: Dipartimento di Scienze Umane per la Formazione “Riccardo Massa”, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, http://hdl.handle.net/10281/46753.
  55. Cambrosio A., Keating P. (1983). The disciplinary stake: the case of chronobiology. Social Studies of Science, 13: 325-353, DOI: 10.1177/030631283013003001
  56. Hoskin K.W. (1993). Education and the genesis of disciplinarity: the unexpected reversal. In: Messer-Davidow E., Shumway D.R., Sylvan D.J., eds. Knowledges: Historical and Critical Studies in Disciplinarity. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia: 271-305.
  57. Dupré J. (2001). Human Nature and the Limits of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  58. Foucault M. (1961). Folie et déraison: histoire de la folie à l’âge classique. Paris: Plon.
  59. Foucault M. (1975). Surveiller et punir: naissance de la prison. Paris: Gallimard.
  60. Foucault M. (1994a). Sur l’archéologie des sciences. Réponse au Cercle d’Épistemologie (1968). Paris: Gallimard.
  61. Foucault M. (1994b). Réponse à une question (1968). Paris: Gallimard.
  62. Gibbons M., Limoges C., Nowotny H., Schwartzman S., Scott P., Trow M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge: the Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage.
  63. Giere R. (2006). Scientific Perspectivism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  64. Good B.J. (1994). Medicine, Rationality and Experience: An Anthropological Perspective. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
  65. Gould S.J. (1977). Ontogeny and Phylogeny. New York: Belknap Harvard.
  66. Griffiths P.E., Stotz K. (2013). Genetics and Philosophy: An Introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  67. Horkheimer M. (1968). Traditionelle und kritische Theorie. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Verlag.
  68. Horkheimer M., Marcuse H. (1965). Philosophie und kritische Theorie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.
  69. Ingold T. (2007). The trouble with “evolutionary biology”. Anthropology Today, 23, 2: 13-17, DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8322.2007.00497.x
  70. Pina M., Gontier N., eds. (2014). The evolution of social communication in primates: a multidisciplinary approach. Dordrecht: Spinger.
  71. Mendoza Straffon L., ed. (2016). Cultural phylogenetics: concepts and applications in archaeology. Dordrecht: Springer, in preparation.
  72. Mesoudi A., Whiten A., Laland K.N. (2006). Towards a unified science of cultural evolution. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29: 329-383, DOI: 10.1017/s0140525x06009083
  73. Montessori M. (1909). Il Metodo della Pedagogia Scientifica applicato all’educazione infantile nelle Case dei Bambini. Roma: Edizioni Opera Nazionale Montessori.
  74. Müller G.B. (2007). EvoDevo: Extending the evolutionary synthesis. Nature Reviews Genetics, 8: 943-949.
  75. Okasha S. (2002). Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  76. Panebianco F., Serrelli E., eds. (2016). Understanding cultural traits. A multidisciplinary perspective on cultural diversity. Dordrecht: Springer.
  77. Pierce S.J. (1991). Subject areas, disciplines and the concept of authority. Library and Information Science Research, 13: 21-35.
  78. Pigliucci M. (2007). Do we need an extended evolutionary synthesis? Evolution, 61, 12: 2743-2749, DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00246.x
  79. Pigliucci M., Müller G., eds. (2010). Evolution: The Extended Synthesis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  80. Pina M., Gontier N., eds. (2014). The evolution of social communication in primates: a multidisciplinary approach. Dordrecht: Spinger, in preparation.
  81. Pombo O. (2004). Interdisciplinaridade: Ambições e Limites. Lisboa: Relógio d’Água.
  82. Serrelli E. (2014). Stephen Jay Gould, Pere Alberch e il modello-orologio dell’eterocronia: incontro e divergenza alle origini di evo-devo. Caianiello S, ed. Da Gould a evo-devo. Percorsi storici e teorici. Roma: CNR Edizioni, pp. 97-128.
  83. Serrelli E. (2016). Evolutionary genetics and cultural traits in a ‘body of theory’ perspective. In Panebianco F, Serrelli E, eds. Understanding cultural traits. A multidisciplinary perspective on cultural diversity. Springer, Switzerland, Chapter 11.
  84. Serrelli E., Gontier N., eds. (2015), Macroevolution: explanation, interpretation, evidence. Dordrecht: Springer.
  85. Stichweh R. (1996). Science in the system of world society. Social Science Information, 35: 327-340,
  86. Stichweh R. (2001). Scientific disciplines, history of. In: Smelser N.J., Baltes P.B., eds. International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Oxford: Elsevier Science: 13727-13731.
  87. Stichweh R. (2003). Differentiation of scientific disciplines: causes and consequences. In: Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS). Paris: UNESCO.
  88. Terzani T. (2004). Un altro giro di giostra. Viaggio nel male e nel bene del nostro tempo. Milano: Longanesi.
  89. Tomasi di Lampedusa G. (1958). Il Gattopardo. Milano: Feltrinelli.
  90. van Fraassen B.C. (2008). Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  91. Wilson D. et al. (2012). Uncomfortable truth: an ecologist in the genetics lab. The Conversation, http://theconversation.edu.au, 10 May 2012.
  93. Internet
  94. University of Milano Bicocca Journal club and graduate conferences: http://www. formazione.unimib.it
  95. Dialogue “The paradox of reciprocity”, November 10, 2010: http://www.unimib.it/ link/evento.jsp?3996538059885908162
  96. Dialogue on science and faith (March 23, 2011): http://www.unimib.it/link/ evento.jsp?7253000851458196565
  97. Lisbon Applied Evolutionary Epistemology Lab: http://appeel.fc.ul.pt

Rossana Brambilla, Emanuele Serrelli, The goals and conditions of successful interdisciplinarity. Some critical guidelines in planning, managing and evaluating interdisciplinary projects in "PARADIGMI" 2/2016, pp 151-169, DOI: 10.3280/PARA2016-002012