Collaboration in Climate Science
by Adam Robbert
Its a climate research kind of day. Nature has THIS article on the successful collaboration of scientists working in teams to solve complex ecological issues (who would have thought!) I applaud this kind of research effort but it does remind me why I found integral ecology appealing in the first place (see my previous). When it comes to doing postdisciplinary research that stretches the natural, social, and humanistic sciences surely the integral ecologists have a leg up on what other folks are doing. There is plenty of good research coming out from all kinds of research institutes but I’m aways struck by just how on top of things the integral ecology crew is when it comes to designing research models and deployable, effective paradigms (the critical realist and science studies folk would have to be at the top of such a list as well).
It’s one thing to talk about solving problems. It’s another to try and actually do it. Philosophy is fine, even necessary, but I find philosophers tend to lack appreciation for the difficult work that goes into actually doing science. Philosophies that sound intuitively appealing on paper are a challenge to operationalize in scientifically testable ways. Of course it goes the other way as well. Many scientists don’t fully appreciate he philosophy that underlies, informs, and contextualizes their work. Both are problems.
Just something to keep in mind.
You’ll get no argument from me, Joe. I think the onus lies largely on humanities scholars to get up to speed on where the scientific research is heading. To be sure, philosophers and other scholars have unique insights to contribute but your call to recognize the complexity of scientific research processes is dead on.