Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T11:29:45.975Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inquiring into Communication in Science: Alternative Approaches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 November 2009

Anton Oleinik
Anton Oleinik*
Affiliation:
Memorial University of Newfoundland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Argument

This article focuses on a problematic character of communication in science. Two solutions are compared: paradigm-based science (the natural sciences model and its extension to the social sciences as represented by economics) and the semiotic solution developed in the arts and social sciences. There are several parallels between the latter approach and Marxist dialectics. A third, original, approach to solving communication problems is proposed; it can be labeled “transactional.” It represents a version of the semiotic solution with particular emphasis on interactions, both face-to-face and depersonalized, and the imperative of negotiating and finding compromises. Communication problems existing at two registers of interactions, face-to-face and depersonalized, are differentiated; freedom is interpreted as the capacity to change the registers at will. An in-depth case study of the Coase theorem in economic sciences and legal studies illustrates key points in the proposed analysis.

Type
Research Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , December 2009 , pp. 613 - 646
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acemoglu, Daron. 2003. “Why Not a Political Coase Theorem? Social Conflict, Commitment, and Politics.” Journal of Comparative Economics 31 (4):620–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreff, Wladimir. 2005. “Post-Soviet Privatization in the Light of the Coase Theorem: Transaction Costs and Governance Costs.” In The Institutional Economics of Russia's Transformation, edited by Oleinik, Anton, 191–212. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Andreff, Wladimir. 1992. “Convergence or Congruence between Eastern and Western Economic Systems.” In Convergence and System Change: The Convergence Hypothesis in the Light of Transition in Eastern Europe, edited by Dallago, Bruno Horst, Brezinski, Dieter, and Andreff, Wladimir, 48–78. Aldershot: Dartmouth.Google Scholar
Babbie, Earl and Benaquisto, Lucia. 2002. Fundamentals of Social Research, (1st Canadian edition). Scarborough, ON: Nelson.Google Scholar
Baehr, Peter. 2005. “The Sociology of Almost Everything: Four Questions to Randall Collins about Interaction Ritual Chains.” Canadian Journal of Sociology Online, January-February <http://www.cjsonline.ca/reviews/interactionritual.html> last accessed March 28, 2008.+last+accessed+March+28,+2008.>Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail. 1979. Problemy poyetiki Dostoyevskogo [Problems of Dostoyevsky's Poetics], 4th edition. Moscow: Sovetskaya Rossiya.Google Scholar
Batishchev, Genrikh. 1969. “Deyatel'nostnaya sushchnost’ cheloveka” [Activity as core characteristics of human being]. In Problema cheloveka v sovremennoy filosofii, 73–144. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Batishchev, Genrikh. [1984] 1997. Vvedeniye v dialectiku tvorchestva [An Introduction to the Dialectics of Creativity]. St. Petersburg: RGHI.Google Scholar
Beauregard, Mathieu. 1999. La folie de Valery Fabrikant. Une analyse sociologique. Paris and Montréal: L'Harmattan.Google Scholar
Becker, Gary S. 1993. “Nobel Lecture: The Economic Way of Looking at Behavior.” Journal of Political Economy 101 (3):385–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bibler, Vladimir S. 1991. Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakthin, ili poyetika kultury [Mikhail Bakthin, or a poetics of culture]. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
Blaug, Mark. [1962] 1996. Economic Theory in Retrospect, 5th edition. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Boltanski, Luc and Chiapello, Eve. 1999. Le nouvel esprit du capitalisme. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Boltanski, Luc and Thévenot, Laurent. 1991. De la justification. Les économies de la grandeur. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Homo academicus. Paris: Ed. de Minuit.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre and Passeron, Jean-Claude. 1970. La reproduction. Éléments pour une théorie du système d'enseignement. Paris: Ed. de Minuit.Google Scholar
Boyko, Maxim, Shleifer, Andrei, and Vishny, Robert. 1995. Privatizing Russia. Cambridge and London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Broman, Thomas. 1989. “University Reform in Medical Thought at the End of the Eighteenth Century.” Osiris 5:36–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broman, Thomas. 1998. “The Habermasian Public Sphere and the ‘Science in the Enlightenment’.” History of Science 36:123–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burton, John. 1978. “Externalities, Property Rights and Public Policy: Private Property Rights or the Spoliation of Nature.” In The Myth of Social Cost: A Critique of Welfare Economics and the Implications for Public Policy, edited by Cheung, Steven N. S., 69–91. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.Google Scholar
Callon, Michel. 2002. “From Science as an Economic Activity to Socioeconomic of Scientific Research: The Dynamics of Emerged and Consolidated Techno-economic Networks.” In Science Bought and Sold: Essays in the Economics of Science, edited by Mirowski, Philip and Sent, Esther-Mirjam, 277–317. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cheung, Steven N. S. 1987. “Coase, Ronald Harry.” In The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, edited by Eatwell, John, Milgate, Murray, and Newman, Peter, vol. 1, 455–7. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Coase, Ronald H. [1960] 1988. “The Problem of Social Cost.” In The Firm, the Market and the Law, edited by Coase, Ronald H., 95–156. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cole, Sally. 2003. Ruth Landes: A Life in Anthropology. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Collins, Randall. 1998. The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change. Cambridge and London: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Collins, Randall. 2005. “Reply to Peter Baehr.” Canadian Journal of Sociology Online, January-February <http://www.cjsonline.ca/reviews/interactionritual.html> last accessed March 28, 2008.+last+accessed+March+28,+2008.>Google Scholar
Commons, John R. 1931. “Institutional Economics.” American Economic Review 21 (4):648–657.Google Scholar
Commons, John R. 1939. Legal Foundations of Capitalism. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Cooter, Robert D. 1987. “Coase Theorem.” In The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, edited by Eatwell, John, Milgate, Murray, and Newman, Peter, vol. 1, 457–60. London and New York: Macmillan and Stockton Press.Google Scholar
Dasgupta, Partha and David, Paul A.. 1994. “Toward a New Economics of Science.” In Science Bought and Sold: Essays in the Economics of Science, edited by Mirowski, Philip and Sent, Esther-Mirjam, 216–48. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Demsetz, Harold. 1967. “Toward a Theory of Property Rights.” American Economic Review 57 (2):347–359.Google Scholar
Demsetz, Harold. 1969. “Information and Efficiency: Another Viewpoint.” Journal of Law and Economics 12 (1):1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denzau, Arthur T. and North, Douglass. 1994. “Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions.” Kyklos 47 (1):3–31.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. 1967. De la grammatologie. Paris: Ed. de Minuit.Google Scholar
Douglas, Mary. 1986. How Institutions Think. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
Dyer, Alan W. 1986. “Semiotics, Economic Development and the Deconstruction of Economic Man.” Journal of Economic Issues 20 (2):541–549.Google Scholar
Eco, Umberto. 1990. “Introduction.” In Universe of the Mind: A Semiotic Theory of Culture, edited by Lotman, Yuri, vii–xiii. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Eggertsson, Thráinn. 1990. Economic Behavior and Institutions. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etkind, Alexandr. 1993. Eros nevozmozhnogo: istoriya psikhoanaliza v Rossii [Eros of the Impossible: A History of Psychoanalysis in Russia]. St. Petersburg: Medusa.Google Scholar
Farnsworth, Ward. 1999. “Do Parties to Nuisance Cases Bargain After Judgment? A Glimpse Inside the Cathedral.” University of Chicago Law Review 66 (2):373–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fullbrook, Edward, ed. 2004. A Guide to What's Wrong with Economics. London: Anthem Press.Google Scholar
Gambetta, Diego. 1991. “‘In the beginning was the Word. . .’ The symbols of the mafia’. Archives européennes de sociologie 22:53–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gechev, Rumen. 2005. Sustainable Development: Economic Aspects. Indianapolis: University of Indianapolis Press.Google Scholar
Geertz, Clifford. 1996. Ici et Là-bas: L'anthropologue comme acteur. Traduit par Daniel Lemoine. Paris: Editions Métailié.Google Scholar
Gerth, Nobuko. 2002. “Between Two Worlds”: Hans Gerth. Eine Biographie 1908–1978. Opladen: Leske and Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, Mark. 1985. “Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness.” American Journal of Sociology 91 (3):481–510.Google Scholar
Gumilev, Lev. [1979] 1989. Etnogenez i biosfera zemli [Ethno-genesis and the Biosphere]. Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo LGU.Google Scholar
Hayek, Friedrich von. 1967. Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heimer, Carol. 1992. “Doing Your Job and Helping Your Friends: Universalistic Norms about Obligations to Particular Others in Networks.” In Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action, edited by Nitin, Nohria and Eccles, Robert G., 143–64. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. 1988. Economics and Institutions: A Manifesto for a Modern Institutional Economics. Cambridge: Polity Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holcombe, Randall H. and Holcombe, Lora P.. 1986. “The Market for Regulation.” Journal of Theoretical and Institutional Economics 142 (4):684–696.Google Scholar
Hsiung, Bingyuan. 2004. “Coase Theorem and the Taiwan Strait Conflict.” Kyklos 57 (4):505–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ilyenkov, Evald. 1977. Dialectical Logic: Essays on Its History and Theory. Translated by Creighton, H. Campbell. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
Ilyenkov, Evald. [1960] 1982. Dialectics of the Abstract and the Concrete in Marx's Capital. Translated by Kuzyakov, Sergey. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Donald. 2006. “Editorial Retraction.” Science 311 (5759):335.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keynes, John M. 1936. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. New York: Harcourt, Brace.Google Scholar
Khessin, Nikolay V. 1964. Voprosy teorii tovara i stoimosti v Kapitale K. Marksa [Issues of the theory of value and commodity in Marx's Capital]. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo MGU.Google Scholar
Khessin, Nikolay V. 1976. “Nekotoriye metodologicheskiye voprosy ‘Kapitala’ Marksa” [Some Methodological Issues of Marx's Capital]. Ekonomicheskiye nauki 8.Google Scholar
Kitch, Edmund W., ed. 1983. “The Fire of Truth: A Remembrance of Law and Economics at Chicago, 1932–1970.” Journal of Law and Economics 26 (1):163–234.Google Scholar
Kripke, Saul A. 1982. Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. [1963] 1972. “Scientific Paradigms.” In: Sociology of Science: Selected Readings, edited by Barnes, Barry, 80–104. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Lewis, David K. 1969. Convention: A Philosophical Study. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lodge, David. 1986. Dialogue in the Modern Novel: The E. J. Pratt Lecture delivered at Memorial University of Newfoundland in 1985. St. John's: MUN.Google Scholar
Lotman, Yuri. 1990. Universe of the Mind: A Semiotic Theory of Culture. Translated by Shukman, Ann. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, Alfred. [1890] 1920. Principles of Economics, 8th edition. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Marx, Karl [1867] 1967. Capital, edited by Engels, Frederick, 1–3. New York: International.Google Scholar
Marx, Karl. [1859] 1970. A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy. Translated by Ryazanskaya, S. W.. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
Marx, Karl and Engels, Frederick. [1845–1846] 1968. The German Ideology. Translated by Ryazanskaya, S. W.. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
Ménard, Claude. [1988] 1989. “The Machine and the Heart: An Essay on Analogies in Economic Reasoning.” Social Concept 5 (1):81–95.Google Scholar
Ménard, Claude. 2005. “Transaction Cost Economics: From the Coase Theorem to Empirical Studies.” In The Institutional Economics of Russia's Transformation, edited by Oleinik, Anton, 45–64. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Merton, Robert K. [1957] 1973a. “Priorities in Scientific Discovery.” In The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, 286–324. Edited and with an Introduction by Norman W. Stoper. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Merton, Robert K. [1968] 1973b. “The Matthew Effect in Science.” In The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, by Merton, Robert K., 439–59. Edited and with an Introduction by Norman W. Stoper. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Merton, Robert K. 1995. “The Thomas Theorem and the Matthew Effect.” Social Forces 74 (2):379–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merton, Robert K. and Zuckerman, Harriet. [1971] 1973. “Institutionalized Patterns of Evaluation in Science.” In The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, by Robert K. Merton, 460–96. Edited and with an Introduction by Stoper, Norman W.. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Nardinelli, Clark and Meiners, Roger E.. 1988. “Schmoller, the Methodenstreit, and the Development of Economic History.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 144 (3):543–551.Google Scholar
North, Douglass C. 1981. Structure and Change in Economic History. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
North, Douglass C. 1984. “Three Approaches to the Study of Institutions.” In Neoclassical Political Economy: The Analysis of Rent-Seeking and DUP Activities, edited by Colander, David C., 33–40. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company.Google Scholar
North, Douglass C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Oleinik, Anton. 2003a. Organized Crime, Prison and Post-Soviet Societies. With a foreword by Alain Touraine. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Oleinik, Anton. 2003b. “Banished to solitary confinement in a tower?. . . (On the institutional organization of science).” Social Sciences 34 (3):44–51.Google Scholar
Oleinik, Anton. 2004a. “A model of network capitalism: basic ideas and post-soviet evidence.” Journal of Economic Issues 38 (1):85–111.Google Scholar
Oleinik, Anton. 2004b. “On universal versus specific categories of network capitalism: A reply to V. Barnett's note.” Journal of Economic Issues 38 (4):1040–1046.Google Scholar
Oleinik, Anton. 2006. “Socialism.” In International Encyclopedia of Economic Sociology, edited by Beckert, Jens and Zafirovski, Milan, 627–631. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Oleinik, Anton. 2008. “Teoremy Kouza: institutsyonal'nye predposylki’” [The Coase Theorems: institutional assumptions]. Ekonomicheskaya nauka sovremennoy Rossii 2 (38):21–39.Google Scholar
Orléan, André. 1988. “L'autoréférence dans la théorie keynésienne de la spéculation.” Cahiers d'Économie Politique 14–15:229–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overbye, Dennis. 2007. “A Tale of Power and Intrigue in the Lab, Based on Real Life.” New York Times, 27 March, p. D3.Google Scholar
Pohorila, Natalia. 2008. “Basis for Legitimacy of Regime: Study of Attitudes toward Privatization in Ukraine.” In Reforming the State without Changing the Model of Power? On Administrative Reform in Post-Socialist Countries, edited by Oleinik, Anton, 191–214. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Polanyi, Michael. [1969] 2002. “The Republic of Science: Its Political and Economic Theory.” In Science Bought and Sold: Essays in the Economics of Science, edited by Mirowski, Philip and Sent, Esther-Mirjam, 465–85. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard. 1977. Economic Analysis of Law, 2nd edition. Boston and Toronto: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Rose, Richard. 1995. “La liberté, valeur fondamentale.” Revue Internationale des Sciences Sociales 145:519–536.Google Scholar
Rozov, Nikolay. 2002. “Sotsiologiya filosofii Rendala Kollinza [Randall Collins] – novy etap samosoznaniya intellektualov v mirovoy istori [The Sociology of Philosophies by Randall Collins: A New Stage in the Development of Intellectuals' Self Consciousness].” In Sotsiologiya filosofii: Global'naya teoriya intellektual'nogo izmeneniya, by Collins, Randall, 7–31. Novosibirsk: Sibirskij chronograph.Google Scholar
Saussier, Stéphane. 2005. “Theory of Optimal Contract: Modeling Contractual Relationships.” In The Institutional Economics of Russia's Transformation, edited by Oleinik, Anton, 65–87. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Secord, James A. 2004. “Knowledge in Transit.” Isis 95:654–672.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schumpeter, Joseph A. [1911] 1983. The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest and the Business Cycle. Translated by Redvers, Opie. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Schutz, Alfred. 1954. “Concept and Theory Formation in the Social Sciences.” Journal of Philosophy 51 (9):257–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven. 1994. A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seventeenth-Century England. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, Herbert A. 1978. “Rationality as Process and as Product of Thought.” American Economic Review 68 (2):2–16.Google Scholar
Skinner, Quentin. 2002. Visions of Politics. Vol. 1: Regarding Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smelser, Neil J. 1998. “The Rational and the Ambivalent in the Social Sciences.” American Sociological Review 63 (1):1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thévenot, Laurent. 1989. “Équilibre et rationalité dans un univers complexe.” Revue économique 40 (2):147–197.Google Scholar
Thévenot, Laurent. 2001. “Pragmatic Regimes Governing the Engagement with the World.” In The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory, edited by Knorr-Cetina, Karin, Schatzki, Theodore R., and Savigny, Eike von, 56–73. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Thévenot, Laurent. 2007. “The plurality of cognitive formats and engagements: moving between the familiar and the public.” European Journal of Social Theory 10 (3):409–423.Google Scholar
Thévenot, Laurent, Eymard-Duvernay, François, Favereau, Olivier, Orléan, André, and Salais, Robert. 2005. “Values, Coordination and Rationality: The Economy of Conventions.” In The Institutional Economics of Russia's Transformation, edited by Oleinik, Anton, 22–44. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Touraine, Alain and Khosrokhavar, Farhad. 2000. La recherche de soi: Dialogue sur le Sujet. Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
Tronev, Konstantin. 1972. “K voprosu ob abstraktnom i konkretnom v politicheskoy ekonomii” [The issues of the abstract and the concrete in political economy]. Vestnik MGU: Seriya Ekonomika 4.Google Scholar
Tronev, Konstantin. 1975. “Eshche raz k voprosy ob abstraktnom i konkretnom v politicheskoy ekonomii” [The issues of the abstract and the concrete in political economy revisited]. Vestnik MGU: Seriya Ekonomika 5.Google Scholar
Vazyulin, Viktor A. 1968. Logika Kapitala Marksa [Logic of Marx's Capital]. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo MGU.Google Scholar
Voynovich, Vladimir. 2003. Portret na fone mifa [The Portrait against the Background of a Myth]. Moscow: EKSMO.Google Scholar
Weber, Max. [1904] 1949. “‘Objectivity’ in social science and social policy.” In The Methodology of the Social Sciences, translated and edited by Shils, Edward A. and Finch, Henry A., 49–112. Glencoe, IL.: Free Press.Google Scholar
Weber, Max. [1922] 1968. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretative Sociology. Edited by Roth, Guenter and Wittich, Claus. New York: Bedminster Press.Google Scholar
Weil, Philippe. 1989. “Increasing Returns and Animal Spirits.” American Economic Review 79 (4):889–894.Google Scholar
Wieviorka, Michel. [1988] 2004. The Making of Terrorism. Translated by White, David G.. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Yefimov, Vladimir. 2003. Économie institutionnelle des transformations agraires en Russie. Paris: L'Harmattan.Google Scholar
Yefimov, Vladimir. 2004. “On pragmatic institutional economics.” Paper presented at the European School on New Institutional Economics seminar.Google Scholar
Zherebkina, Irina. 2002. Zhenskoye politicheskoye bessoznatel'noye [Women's Political Unconsciousness]. St. Petersburg: Althaea.Google Scholar
Zulaika, Joseba and Douglass, William A.. 1996. Terror and Taboo: The Follies, Fables, and Faces of Terrorism. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Zweynert, Joachim. 2006. “Shared Mental Models, Catch-up Development and Economic Policy-Making: The Case of Germany after World War II and Its Significance for Contemporary Russia.” Eastern Economic Journal 32 (3):457–478.Google Scholar