000 Informatik, Informationswissenschaft, allgemeine Werke
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Book (19) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (19)
Keywords
- Bildnis (1)
- Böhmen (1)
- Datenmanagement (1)
- Deutschland (1)
- Digitale Daten (1)
- Forschungsprozess (1)
- Frankfurt <Main> (1)
- Frankfurt <Main> / Universität (1)
- Gelehrter (1)
- Künstler (1)
Institute
- Präsidium (2)
- Geographie (1)
- Kulturwissenschaften (1)
- Sprachwissenschaften (1)
Why do we need to communicate science? Is science, with its highly specialised language and its arcane methods, too distant to be understood by the public? Is it really possible for citizens to participate meaningfully in scientific research projects and debate? Should scientists be mandated to engage with the public to facilitate better understanding of science? How can they best communicate their special knowledge to be intelligible? These and a plethora of related questions are being raised by researchers and politicians alike as they have become convinced that science and society need to draw nearer to one another. Once the persuasion took hold that science should open up to the public and these questions were raised, it became clear that coming up with satisfactory answers would be a complex challenge. The inaccessibility of scientific language and methods, due to ever increasing specialisation, is at the base of its very success. Thus, translating specialised knowledge to become understandable, interesting and relevant to various publics creates particular perils. This is exacerbated by the ongoing disruption of the public discourse through the digitisation of communication platforms. For example, the availability of medical knowledge on the internet and the immense opportunities to inform oneself about health risks via social media are undermined by the manipulable nature of this technology that does not allow its users to distinguish between credible content and misinformation. In countries around the world, scientists, policy-makers and the public have high hopes for science communication: that it may elevate its populations educationally, that it may raise the level of sound decision-making for people in their daily lives, and that it may contribute to innovation and economic well-being. This collection of current reflections gives an insight into the issues that have to be addressed by research to reach these noble goals, for South Africa and by South Africans in particular.
Modern-day science is under great pressure. A potent mix of increasing expectations, limited resources, tensions between competition and cooperation, and the need for evidence-based funding is creating major change in how science is conducted and perceived. Amidst this 'perfect storm' is the allure of 'research excellence', a concept that drives decisions made by universities and funders, and defines scientists' research strategies and career trajectories. But what is 'excellent' science? And how to recognise it? After decades of inquiry and debate there is still no satisfactory answer. Are we asking the wrong question? Is reality more complex, and 'excellence in science' more elusive, than many are willing to admit? And how should excellence be defined in different parts of the world, particularly in lower-income countries of the 'Global South' where science is expected to contribute to pressing development issues, despite often scarce resources? Many wonder whether the Global South is importing, with or without consenting, the flawed tools for research evaluation from North America and Europe that are not fit for purpose. This book takes a critical view of these issues, touching on conceptual issues and practical problems that inevitably emerge when 'excellence' is at the center of science systems. Emerging from the capacity-building work of the Science Granting Councils Initiative in sub-Saharan Africa, it speaks to scholars, as well as to managers and funders of research around the world. Confronting sticky problems and uncomfortable truths, the chapters contain insights and recommendations that point towards new solutions - both for the Global South and the Global North.
Diwan-i albisa
(1887)
Wie profitierte die KWG von der nationalsozialistischen Politik, die Eigentumsrechte an politische bzw. rassistische Kategorien knüpfte? Dieser Frage wird im folgenden anhand von Fallbeispielen bei der Übernahme von Immobilien und dem Umgang mit Stiftungsgeldern nachgegangen. Dabei wird deutlich, daß sich – namentlich in der Agrarforschung – Fälle von Teilhabe an Geschäften häuften, die als „unredlich“ zu klassifizieren sind. Auch auf dem Gebiet der Verwendung von Mitteln, die der KWG von Juden in Form von Stiftungen überlassen worden waren, folgte die KWG den Grundsätzen der nationalsozialistischen Eigentumspolitik, sofern dies zu ihrem eigenen Vorteil war. Stiftungen wurden umbenannt und umgewidmet. Es zeichnet sich allerdings ab, daß schon vor 1933 in der KWG ein laxer Umgang mit dem Willen der Stifter üblich gewesen zu sein scheint, der bis an die Grenze der Mißachtung gesetzlicher Vorgaben ging.