Η διάγνωση των επιστημολογικών στάσεων και ο δείκτης γνωσιακής αρετής στη διεπιστημονική έρευνα

Abstract

Interdisciplinarity and interdisciplinary collaborations have, in recent decades, been central to research programmes and funding policies. However, empirical evidence indicates that many interdisciplinary collaborations struggle to achieve true knowledge integration and to include the humanities and social sciences in addressing complex problems, where their contribution is vital. This paper argues that a significant part of these difficulties does not mainly arise from linguistic or communicative barriers, but from the epistemological and metaphysical assumptions that shape the different worldviews of the collaborating disciplines and cause divergences between them, thereby decreasing the effectiveness of collaboration. To address this challenge, the paper proposes the hypothesis that diagnosing, mapping, and analysing the initial epistemological and metaphysical assumptions of the fields involved in an interdisciplinary project can help improve interdisciplinary practice. Mutual understanding of different conceptual terms, views on scientific methods, the role of language, the importance of logic, and, more broadly, the principles characterising each scientific discipline can be achieved by identifying the key areas of convergence and divergence among the initial positions from which researchers from diverse backgrounds approach interdisciplinary collaborations. Against this background, the paper introduces a new philosophical tool for diagnosing epistemological stances, which standardises and visualises the initial assumptions of members of an interdisciplinary team. It also presents the “Cognitive Virtue Index” as the key innovation of this tool. The tool functions digitally, does not require a facilitator, and promotes epistemological self-awareness and the self-regulating adjustment of collaborators towards cognitive alignment aimed at the goals of interdisciplinary collaboration.