The Situational Logic of Disciplinary Scholarship

  • Fred D’AgostinoEmail author


Ian C. Jarvie developed the idea of situational logic in a subtle and effective way. He was also interested in, as well as a contributor to, the institution of academic publication. This chapter provides a situational analysis of an important recurrent pattern in academic publishing, namely, the concentration of work around particular topics, despite the fact that most such work will be unrewarded in the economy of esteem that is meant to be in play.


  1. Abbott, Andrew. 1999. Department and Discipline: Chicago Sociology at One Hundred. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Arthur, W. Brian. 1994. Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barry, Brian. 1975. The Liberal Theory of Justice: A Critical Examination of the Principal Doctrines in a Theory of Justice. The Philosophical Review 84 (4): 598–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1988. Homo Academicus. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  5. Brennan, Geoffrey, and Philip Pettit. 2004. The Economy of Esteem: An Essay on Civil and Political Society. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brouthers, K.D., R. Mudambi, and D.M. Reeb. 2012. The Blockbuster Hypothesis: Influencing the Boundaries of Knowledge. Scientometrics 90 (3): 959–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chubin, Daryl E., and Terence Connolly. 1982. Research Trails and Science Policies. In Scientific Establishments and Hierarchies, ed. N. Elias, H. Martins, and R. Whitley. Dordrecht and Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, Gerald A. 2009. Why Not Socialism? Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Collins, Randall. 1998. The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. D’Agostino, Fred B. 1988. Relativism and Reflective Equilibrium. The Monist 71 (3): 420–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. ———. 1996. Free Public Reason. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. ———. 2000. Incommensurability and Commensuration. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 32: 429–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. ———. 2011. Rational Agency. In The Sage Handbook of the Philosophy of Social Sciences, ed. I.C. Jarvie and J. Zamora-Bonilla, 182–198. Los Angeles: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. ———. 2012. Disciplinarity and the Growth of Knowledge. Social Epistemology 26 (3–4): 331–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. ———. 2016. Disciplines, the Division of Epistemic Labor, and Agency. In Social Epistemology and Epistemic Agency, ed. P. Reider. London: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  16. Daniels, Norman, ed. 1975. Reading Rawls: Critical Studies on ‘A Theory of Justice’. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Hayek, Friedrich A. 1967. The Theory of Complex Phenomena. In Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics, ed. F. Hayek. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  18. Healy, Kieran. 2013. A Co-Citation Network for Philosophy.
  19. Jarvie, Ian C. 1998. Situational Logic and Its Reception. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 28 (3): 365–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jarvie, Ian C., and Fred B. D’Agostino, eds. 1989. Freedom and Rationality: Essays in Honor of John Watkins. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Kitcher, Phillip. 2001. Science, Truth and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kuhn, Thomas S. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lewis, Jenny M. 2013. Academic Governance: Disciplines and Policy. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1981. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  25. March, James G. 1991. Exploration and Exploitation in Organization Learning. Organization Science 2: 71–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Merton, Robert K. 1968. The Matthew Effect in Science. Science 159: 3810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pettit, Philip. 1974. A Theory of Justice? Theory and Decision 4 (3): 311–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. ———. 1997. Republicanism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  29. Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Ross, Lee. 1977. The Intuitive Psychologist and His Shortcomings: Distortions in the Attribution Process. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ed. L. Berokowitz, vol. 10. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  31. Simon, Herbert A. 1956. Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment. Psychological Review 63 (2): 129–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. ———. 1991. Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning. Organization Science 2 (1): 125–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Storer, Norman W. 1965. The Social System of Science. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  34. ———. 1973. Introduction. In The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, ed. N. Storer. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Teece, David J. 1998. Design Issues for Innovative Firms: Bureaucracy, Incentives and Industrial Structure. In The Dynamic Firm: The Role of Technology, Strategy, Organization, and Regions, ed. A. Chandler, P. Hagstrom, and O. Solvell, 134–165. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Upham, S. Phineas, and Henry Small. 2010. Emerging Research Fronts in Science and Technology: Patterns of New Knowledge Development. Scientometrics 83 (1): 15–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Whitley, Richard. 1984. The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  38. Wilson, Bryan, ed. 1970. Rationality. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  39. Wolff, Robert P. 1979. Understanding Rawls: A Reconstruction and Critique of a Theory of Justice. The Journal of Philosophy 76 (9): 496–510.Google Scholar
  40. Woolgar, Steve. 1995. Representation, Cognition, and Self: What Hope for an Integration of Psychology and Sociology? In Ecologies of Knowledge: Work and Politics in Science and Technology, ed. S.L. Star. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  41. Zhou, Xueguang. 2002. Organization Decision Making as Rule Following. In Organizational Decision Making, ed. Zur Shapira. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Advanced Studies in the HumanitiesThe University of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations