Abstract

This article maps a controversy in network science over the last 15 years, dividing the field about the epistemic status of a central notion, scale-freeness. The article accounts for the two main disputes, in 2005 and in 2018, as they unfolded in academic publications and on social media. This article analyzes the conflict, and the reasons why it reignited in 2018, to the surprise of many. It is argued that (1) the concept of complex networks is shared by the distinct subcultures of theorists and experimentalists; and that (2) these subcultures have incompatible approaches to knowledge: nomothetic (scale-freeness is the sign of a universal law) and idiographic (scale-freeness is an empirical characterization). Following Galison, this article contends that network science is a trading zone where theorists and experimentalists can trade knowledge across the epistemic divide.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.