Internal Interdisciplinarity Beats Panels

Updated: 2025.09.08 1M ago 2 sources
Staged 'X‑meets‑Y' conferences and cross‑discipline grant consortia rarely produce durable insights because the participants lack shared methods, incentives, or mutual respect. The interdisciplinary work that matters happens when one researcher deeply learns multiple fields and integrates them internally (or in small, organic collaborations around a concrete problem). Funders should back cross‑training and problem‑anchored teams rather than panel optics. — It challenges prevailing research‑funding fashions and suggests a redesign of incentives toward individual cross‑training and small, method‑aligned collaborations.

Sources

Patrick Collison on the Irish Enlightenment
Tyler Cowen 2025.09.08 63% relevant
Collison’s 'colocated cauldron' of Swift, Berkeley, Petty, Hutcheson, Burke, and Cantillon exemplifies small, organic clusters producing outsized advances (proto‑monetarism, national banking, statistics), echoing the claim that real breakthroughs come from compact, problem‑anchored collaborations rather than staged, bureaucratic interdisciplinarity.
The only interdisciplinary conversations worth having
Paul Bloom 2025.09.08 100% relevant
Bloom cites Jerry Fodor’s line—'the only interdisciplinary conversations worth having are those that go on inside a single head'—and recounts Templeton prayer‑grant committees and failed psychologist–anthropologist pairings.
← Back to All Ideas