The translation of uniformity or a sociology of knowledge: issues of publishing ethics in the 21st entury

Pachankis, Yang (2022): The translation of uniformity or a sociology of knowledge: issues of publishing ethics in the 21st entury. Forthcoming in: Axiomathes

Abstract

The research adheres to a sociology of knowledge doctrine in academic publishing, and study the irregularities in scientific publishing. It takes the perspective in modern science, with an analytic perspective to the Chinese cultural anthropology. The research empirically studied the grey-area publication surrogacy industry originated from PRC, with its relations to the national governmental funding structures in economics & finance. The research started upon the notice of degree vacancy trading and dissertation sales in PRC, where impositions on specific journal targeting for faculties and ideological correctness for students apply institutionally, and armed forces departments are instituted in almost all major universities. The method takes a step aback on the foundation of modern science and the scientific method that may address the complexities of the issues in a relatively simplistic manner. The results suggest that science doesn’t depend on language, even though language is a constituent in sociology. The sociology of knowledge is purposed to communicate scientific knowledge, regardless of the philosophical debates. Power political meta-languages may be signs for caution, and the realpolitik disruptions to the sociology of knowledge are present. The economics of knowledge ought not to be manipulated by power political & realpolitik top-down designs and scientometrics in the informatics age need humanitarian cautions.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: ideology; knowledge economy; knowledge industry; science financing; science management; scientometrics
• Subjects: A - General Economics and Teaching > A1 - General Economics > A11 - Role of Economics ; Role of Economists ; Market for Economists; A - General Economics and Teaching > A1 - General Economics > A12 - Relation of Economics to Other Disciplines; A - General Economics and Teaching > A1 - General Economics > A13 - Relation of Economics to Social Values; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C4 - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics > C44 - Operations Research ; Statistical Decision Theory; D - Microeconomics > D4 - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design > D46 - Value Theory; D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D63 - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement; D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D73 - Bureaucracy ; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations ; Corruption; D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D74 - Conflict ; Conflict Resolution ; Alliances ; Revolutions; D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D80 - General; D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D83 - Search ; Learning ; Information and Knowledge ; Communication ; Belief ; Unawareness; E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E2 - Consumption, Saving, Production, Investment, Labor Markets, and Informal Economy > E26 - Informal Economy ; Underground Economy; E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E5 - Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit > E58 - Central Banks and Their Policies; L - Industrial Organization > L4 - Antitrust Issues and Policies > L41 - Monopolization ; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices

References

Basken, P. (2012). Surge in Journal Retractions May Mask Decline in Actual Problems. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/surge-in-journal-retractions-may-mask-decline-in-actual- problems/

Bohm, D. (2004). On Dialogue. Routledge. ISBN: 978-0415336413.

Brainard, J. & You, J. (2018). What a massive database of retracted papers reveals about science publishing's "death penalty’. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav8384

Carey, B. (2015). Science, Now Under Scrutiny Itself. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/science/retractions-coming-out-from-under-science-rug.html

Fang, F.C., Steen, R.G., & Casadevall, A. (2012). Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. PNAS, 109(42): 17028-17033. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212247109

Friedrich, V. (1995). The Internalization of Nazism and its Effects on German Psychoanalysts and their Patients. Am. Imago, 52(3), 261–279. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26304609

Grant, E. (1996). The Foundations of Modern Science in the Middle Ages: Their Religious, Institutional and Intellectual Contexts. London, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 978-0521567626.

Menzies, G. (2003). 1421: The Year China Discovered America. Perennial. ISBN: 0-06-054094-X.

Pachankis, Y.I. (2022a). The Cultural Revisionist Element behind P. R. China#s Neo-Nazism: A Cross-cultural and Cross-religion Research. Int. J. Adv. Multidisc. Res. Stud., 2(4): 435-451.

Pachankis, Y.I. (2022b). The Modern Origins & Sources of China#s Techtransfer. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res., 13(7): 18-25. https://doi.org/10.14299/ijser.2022.07.01

Pachankis, Y.I. (2022c). Shift Balance of Centralized Banking System -- Saving Democracy from Populism. MPRA paper. Germany: University Library of Munich. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pra:mprapa:115606

Retraction Watch (2021). The Top Retractions of 2021. The Scientist. https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/the-top-retractions-of-2021-69533

Rogers, L. (2009). The History of Negative Numbers. NRICH. London: University of Cambridge. https://nrich.maths.org/5961

Senn, A. (1937). The Art of Linguistics. The Modern Language Journal, 21(7), 501–506. https://doi.org/10.2307/317198

Steen R.G., Casadevall A., & Fang F.C. (2013). Why Has the Number of Scientific Retractions Increased?. PLOS ONE, 8(7): e68397. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0068397

Schneider, J., Woods, N.D., Proescholdt, R. et al. (2022). Reducing the Inadvertent Spread of Retracted Science: recommendations from the RISRS report. Res Integr Peer Rev 7, 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-022-00125-x

Van Noorden, R. (2011). Science publishing: The trouble with retractions. Nature, 478: 26–28. https://doi.org/10.1038/478026a