Study On Academic Sovereignty In Scientific Discovery

Scientific discovery studies are important subordinates of science studies, since scientific discovery is the central contents of scientific activity. The interpretation models of scientific discovery can be divided into three kinds: mentalism, cultural determinism and constructivism. The mentalism model regards scientific discovery as reflections on natural objects and laws, and the process of scientific discovering regarded as odd enlightenment and gestalt transform. The cultural determinism model holds on standard view of science. This model advocates that the emergence of scientific discovery dues to cultural conditions riping: as long as culture develops into some critical condition, corresponding discoveries will naturally emerge. However, because of cultural determinism model based on linear evolutionary ideas, this model has to face several paradoxes. The constructivism model advocates that scientific discovery is social fact constructed by scientific partcicipants, and the meaning of discovery derives from social construction. But constructivism model overlooks willed and practical elements contained in scientific discovery.In order to find an appropriate interpretation model, we put forward the conception of academic sovereignty from the angle of practical hermeneutics. Academic sovereignty is not only the highest power within certain research scope, but also the practical destination of scientific controversy. The legitimacy of academic sovereignty is based on the bi-agreement of human actors and inhuman actors as well as the bi-agreement of actors outside academic sovereignty research scope and inside ones. Academic sovereignty has bi-structure of macro-power and micro-power and bi-function of suppression and construction. Paramountcy, singleness and practicality are the characteristics of academic sovereignty. Practical situation, academic norms, academic power and academic authority consist of academic sovereignty. Founders of academic sovereignty, successors of the founders and other scientific elites, common researchers and the public are the subjective elements of academic power system. The contradiction of people who hold academic sovereignty and those who have academic sovereignty is the main impetus of academic sovereignty changed.Employing the game theory, we carefully analyze the discovery priority dispute of calculus so as to uncover inherent relationship of academic sovereignty and the priority dispute of scientific discovery. The essence of priority dispute is of contesting academic sovereignty of calculus. The people who win academic sovereignty can legally make their research results as "discoveries", and then win the priority of scientific discoveries. Isaac Newton and Wilhelm Leibniz share the honor of calculus inventor is because of the power of Newton's academic alliance conterbalanced by Leibniz' academic alliance, instead of the similarity of the fluxion and differential calculus. Game analysis also indicates that Newton and Leibniz took kinds of tactics in struggling for academic sovereignty. These tactics apparently are rational and impartial, but actually they applied to realize the largest interests of the party concerned. It enlightens us to review the social value of the priority dispute of scientific discovery.Through studying the process of Darwin's evolution academic sovereignty of evolutionary research scope founded, the paper shows the typical process and laws of academic sovereignty. Scientists try their best to realize academic aspiration, even though they sometimes don't pursue material interests. Academic sovereignty founders often take kinds of tactics to get rid of different opinions and strive for more scientific actor's supports. Academic sovereignty is established through some rites.The founders usually generalize and standardize special theories in order to consolidate their academic sovereignty. Through training and disciplining new actors, the founders make these new actors consciously agree and obey certain academic sovereignty, thereby academic sovereignty is consolidated.Traditionally, Scientific discovery is regarded as esperiential fact contained in some accepted conception frames from traditional views. In facts, scientific discovery has more social meaning. The existence of scientific discovery is due to contextually corresponding with certain social circle's interests at the back of given conception frames. The essence of scientific discovery being not only depends on legitimacy of epistemology: empirical support and logical proof, but also on the legitimacy of axiology and ontology: according with scientific actor's common will and interest as well as cultural tradition. Moreover, the latter determines the former. Multiple discoveries aren't spontaneous objective facts or inevitable results of culture developing; instead they are the results of opposite academic alliances striving for academic sovereignty and temporarily compromising. The investigation of Nobel Prize selected process reveals that academic sovereignty influents on scientific awards. Scientific awards aren't efficient "machines choosing the best", but power fields filled with the activity of striving for and defending given academic sovereignty. The results and awards ceremony are the tokens of academic sovereignty legalized and socialized rather than science developing logic.Science norms and names-follow-founders are important ways of academic sovereignty symbolized and objectified. Through deeply deconstructing Merton's norms, the paper indicates that scientific norms substantially form panoptical wide-area power controlling fields. The social destination of the fields is controlling and consolidating certain academic sovereignty by the way of subtle disciplinary technique. Names-follow-founders are not only symbols for memory and commemoration, but also are tokens and legalization way of academic sovereignty.Lastly, based on dialectical analysis the rationality based on nature and the one based on negotiation rationality, the paper puts forward that science is democratic in substance and social facts based on scientific actors' independent agreement and mutual negotiation. Science is significant realization forms of democracy. Undemocratic phenomena in science are alienation and distortion of the democratic essence of science. Academic hegemony is excessive manifestation. When academic hegemony ought to be overcome, we should actively blazon forth the democratic essence of science, promote public participating science, and beside strengthen democratic supervision inside science.The key solutions to academic hegemony are holding on rational critical spirits and free thinking.