1/ I'm sure the STS folks can say this better but, Single-author papers or projects aren't interdisciplinary. They can't be.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @generativist
Artem Kaznatcheev Retweeted Artem Kaznatcheev
I want to disagree. Consider my recent paper: https://twitter.com/kaznatcheev/status/1102973539634892800 … Would you call this not interdisciplinary? Why? I think interdisciplinary work is very hard, and we often fall short of it. Regardless of the composition of our team. But I want to imagine it is achievable.
Artem Kaznatcheev added,
Artem Kaznatcheev @kaznatcheevLocal peaks can't always be found quickly! Hard landscapes are subject to ultimate constraint on evolution: computation. Can hide winding paths. http://www.genetics.org/content/early/2019/03/04/genetics.119.302000 … My path to this paper has been very long: ~7 years in the making. It finally found its peak in@GeneticsGSA. pic.twitter.com/LiYdL9elc8Show this thread2 replies 2 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @kaznatcheev
💥 (wannabe) Ƀreaker of (the Bad) Loops 💫 Retweeted 💥 (wannabe) Ƀreaker of (the Bad) Loops 💫
So, I'm not going to defend my position too strongly because it's not that far from a hot take, but,https://twitter.com/generativist/status/1111777710102052864 …
💥 (wannabe) Ƀreaker of (the Bad) Loops 💫 added,
💥 (wannabe) Ƀreaker of (the Bad) Loops 💫 @generativistReplying to @vbentiiYea, I think that's part of it... At least my perception of interdisciplinary *has been* "I'm an expert in this and that." But, I think it's better thought of as "what I study lies partly here and partly there." A bit hand-wavy, but...hey, this is a hot take ;)2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @generativist @kaznatcheev
So, I absolutely *would* call your work interdisciplinary. But, I mostly wish there was a different word. Like, if you're able to do it well as a single author, I think it says something about the disciplinary boundaries that demands emphasis.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @generativist
If you force interdisciplinary work to be by def. multi-author then you might trap us in Conway's law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law … With people contributing separate 'parts' to paper & never integrating it into 1 coherent whole & one mind. I wouldn't even call that interdisciplinary.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @kaznatcheev
Oh yea, I agree with that completely. But, I also think the word "interdisciplinary" is a manifestation OF Conways law, which may be part of what I'm trying to work out.
3 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @generativist
People have tried to introduce other words, like transdisciplinary and nondisciplinary, etc. Are you trying to deflate the word interdisiplinary? And argue that it is not something that we should aspire to? In that case, I would agree (for a proper definition of the word).
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @kaznatcheev
(Are you someone who deletes your posts on a rotating schedule? Because I wanted to set a reminder with a link.)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @generativist
I do not delete my posts. So definitely do set a link. Also, I'm happy to discuss this over DM or email.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Yes, I'd like to do that first, but it may be useful to write about, also. Reminder set 
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.