000 04586nam a22004815i 4500
001 978-3-031-65498-5
003 DE-He213
005 20251030112848.0
007 cr nn 008mamaa
008 240810s2024 sz | s |||| 0|eng d
020 _a9783031654985
_9978-3-031-65498-5
024 7 _a10.1007/978-3-031-65498-5
_2doi
050 4 _aJC11-607
072 7 _aJPA
_2bicssc
072 7 _aPOL010000
_2bisacsh
072 7 _aJPA
_2thema
100 1 _aBoisen, Camilla.
_eauthor.
_4aut
_4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut
_982174
245 1 0 _aMerit, Justice, and the Political Theory of Academic Knowledge Production
_h[electronic resource] /
_cby Camilla Boisen, Matthew C. Murray.
250 _a1st ed. 2024.
264 1 _aCham :
_bSpringer Nature Switzerland :
_bImprint: Palgrave Macmillan,
_c2024.
300 _aIX, 133 p. 1 illus.
_bonline resource.
336 _atext
_btxt
_2rdacontent
337 _acomputer
_bc
_2rdamedia
338 _aonline resource
_bcr
_2rdacarrier
347 _atext file
_bPDF
_2rda
505 0 _aChapter 1: Introduction: Why interrogate the Concept of Merit -- Chapter 2: Production and Politique: Establishing Academic Production as Political -- Chapter 3: Merit as Moral: Merit as Moral: Justifications for Applications of Power -- Chapter 4: The Merit Mythology: Merit as Natural Selection -- Chapter 5: Accepting Dissent, Resistance and Error -- Chapter 6: Relegating the Rule of Merit and Escaping ‘Academic Fingertrap’.
520 _aAcademia has long established itself as an institution of knowledge and ideas. Facing pressure, many academic fields and institutions have turned their attention, singularly and collectively, to the task of what to do to rectify the causes of under-representations both academic knowledge itself and who gets to be an academic producer of knowledge. Boisen and Murray argue that simply solving the contemporary symptoms of inequity in ideas, knowledge production and the academy is not enough. Political Theory must be used to analyze why dominant ideas and institutions, namely merit and the resulting meritocracy and meritocratic procedures, were given power in the first place. In using political theory and theories of justice, the book argues that academia must radically shift rather than procedurally reform these methods of evaluation in order to achieve a more coherent approach to diversity in ideas, academic knowledge producers and academic knowledge production, which are necessary to bring about other forms of social change and reform in our larger world. In questioning the ideals and the use of rival ideals to temper flawed concepts, the present motivations and justifications for producing academic knowledge can be relegated as political tools, allowing true meaningful reform. Boisen and Murray show how contemporary crises in academia around diversification of perspectives can only be solved by considering the justifications of academic knowledge production, and the inherent risk of retaining the established competitive and presumptively ‘natural’, but ultimately biased, methods of deriving academic authority. Camilla Boisen is a historian of political thought. She is Senior Lecturer of Writing and Associate Dean of Curricular Academic Planning for the Arts & Humanities at New York University, Abu Dhabi. Matthew C. Murray is the Assistant Director for Growthpolicy and Program Support at the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. Matt runs the interdisciplinary research portal, Growthpolicy, supports the work of M-RCBG’s other 18 programs, has 3 previous published titles along with academic articles and taught Philosophy at Providence College for a decade in the fields of Political and Social Philosophy, Ethics and Moral Philosophy .
650 0 _aPolitical science.
_958714
650 1 4 _aPolitical Theory.
_970609
700 1 _aMurray, Matthew C.
_eauthor.
_4aut
_4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut
_982175
710 2 _aSpringerLink (Online service)
773 0 _tSpringer Nature eBook
776 0 8 _iPrinted edition:
_z9783031654978
776 0 8 _iPrinted edition:
_z9783031654992
776 0 8 _iPrinted edition:
_z9783031655005
856 4 0 _uhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-65498-5
912 _aZDB-2-POS
912 _aZDB-2-SXPI
999 _c62379
_d62379