Sociology of Scientific Knowledge is a relatively new addition to sociology, emerging only several decades ago in the late 1970’s, and focuses on the theories and methods of science. It is seen as a notable success within the fields of sociology and sociology of science. In its infancy, SSK was primarily a British academic endeavor. These days, it is studied and practiced all over the world, with heavy influences in Germany, Scandinavia, Israel, the Netherlands, France, Australia, and North America.
David Hess tells us that in science, a black box is any device for which the input and output are specified but the internal mechanisms are not. “Sometimes the study of this content is described as ‘opening a black box’” (Whitley 1972). Advocates of SSK have criticized the Institutional Sociology of Science of leaving a black box of content unopened, and examining only the exogenous, institutional aspects of science and technology. Traditionally, studying the content of science from a sociological perspective had been very controversial.
Hess tells us that one way to characterize this study of the content of science and technology is with constructivism. He succinctly boils down the term and designates it as any approach which attempts to trace the incidences which shape the content of science and technology. However Hess also notes that “one can analyze the social factors that influence the content of scientific knowledge or technological design and yet also conclude that the constraints of observations or efficacy (the real world) play an equal or greater shaping role in what eventually becomes the consensus.” To understand this idea further, we can look at the term “social constructivism.” In simple terms, these are studies which ...
... middle of paper ...
..., symmetry and impartiality. Collins argues that by studying scientific controversies one can determine how scientific knowledge is created, disseminated, and validated.
There are three main components of the EPOR: Interpretive flexibility where the results of scientific experiments can be interpreted in different ways. Closure mechanisms where debates in science are not closed strictly on the basis of evidence, as this evidence is contested, rather microsociological factors close debates. And the third component implies that microsociological factors can, in principle, be linked to macrosociological factors.
Works Cited
Collins, H.M. 1981 Introduction: Stages in the Empirical Programme of Relativism, Social Studies of Science pp. 3-10
Sismondo, S. 2004 An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies
Hess, D. 1997 Science Studies: An Advanced Introduction
Wiebe E Bijker, T. P. (1987). The Social Construction of Technological Systems. London: The MIT Press.
It is clear throughout the “Double Helix” that there are a set of well-defined norms that underlie the actions of the researchers in the labs discussed by Watson. These norms are consistent throughout Watson’s tale and shape much of the narrative, they include: competitiveness between labs, a vast network of interdisciplinary shared information that Merton would refer to as communism, and a rigid hierarchy that determines to some extent whose work is deemed credible. These norms affected each of the players in Watson’s book to different degrees, and both helped and hindered the advancement of discovery.
Schlager, Neil, and Josh Lauer. Science and Its Times: Understanding the Social Significance of Scientific Discovery. Detroit: Gale Group, 2000. Print.
Most scientists want to be able to share their data. Scientists are autonomous by nature. Begelman (1968) refutes an argument made by I. L. Horowitz who is a scientist that believes that the government is in “gross violations of the autonomous nature of science”. B...
Earlier Science was treated as an institution but now, it includes many things like "scientific experiments, "theories" etc. The authors argue that this knowledge should viewed in terms of "socially constructed" and not the one known as "scientific truth". This article points that in the social constructivist view, the 'science' it is just another system of knowledge which contains empirical researches and studies. It is basically concerned with what is "truth", how it has emerged, accepted and explained in social domain. ...
Thomas Kuhn, an American Philosopher of Science in the twentieth century, introduced the controversial idea of "paradigm shifts" in his 1962 book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions." This essay will discuss paradigm shifts, scientific revolutions, mop up work, and other key topics that Kuhn writes about in "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" in great detail. This essay will explain what Kuhn means by mop up work, by drawing on the broader view of paradigms that he presents and explaining how paradigms are born and develop such that they structure the activities of normal science in specific ways, and this essay will show how this kind of mop up work can, in certain circumstances, lead to a new paradigm instead of more normal science.
Sultan , Sabbar S. “The Controversy of Sciences : Humanities Revisited.” IJAPS November 2008 : 4.
Prior to the 1990’s, the problem of scientific objectivity was a question many philosophers tried to grapple with. Initially, the Logical Positivist’s view of scientific objectivity was most popular. They held to the belief that science was overall objective because of the distinction between the “context of discovery” and “context of justification,” which still allowed for science to contain some subjective elements (Longino 172). Basically, Positivist’s allowed for subjective qualities, such as mental makeup of scientists and values scientist brought in to their scientific work, by stating that the initial formulation or “discovery” of hypothesis/theories included subjective qualities. However, these subjective characteristics were negated by the fact that when investigating theories scientists focused on comparing their hypothesis to observable consequences in an empirical and objective manor (“context of justification). Thus, this allowed the Positivist’s to “acknowledge the play of subjective factors in initial development of hypotheses and theories while guaranteeing that their acceptance [is] determined not by subjective preferences but by observed reality” (Longino 172). However, although this theory was popular for some period of time, a philosopher by the name of Helen Longino approached the problem of scientific objectivity in a different way. She believed that science was a social practice that involved the inevitable input of various subjective factors such as scientist’s values, beliefs, etc… when performing their work. However, she goes on to say that what made science objective was the process in which scientist performed their work. She essentially thought that if the process in which scientist gained knowledge wa...
Sociology has become very prevalent in our everyday lives. Almost anything that anyone can think of involves Sociology in some way. Since Sociology plays a big role in everyday life, even when some people might not know it, that leaves many wondering what exactly Sociology is. Where did it come from? How has it become what it is today? The main reasons for Sociology being around today are the questions that are being asked Sociology, along with other social sciences, help examine the world and figure out what it takes in order to make the world a better place.
However, other social sciences such as anthropology study practices within societies either from the past or very distant from our own society. Bauman (1990:4) states that unless we are actively trying to seek a deeper meaning to common sense it will remain an ‘obvious’ meaning. One similarity between common and sociological sense is that both exist in an attempt to give structure to the society in which we live in. However, sociological sense seeks to give a deeper and less obvious meaning. Another difference between common and sociological understanding is that sociological understanding relies on facts derived from research whereas common sense relies on ideas held by collective society. Unlike many other scholarly subjects – ‘sociological discourse is wide open’ (Bauman 1990:11). When talking about subjects like physics and biology, a certain type of discourse is required whereas, within sociology, the discourse is the same as
The two fundamental components of Kuhn’s proposition of scientific revolutions are the concepts of paradigms and paradigm shifts. He defines paradigms as “sufficiently unprecedented [theories] to attract an enduring group of adherents away from competing modes of scientific activity” (Kuhn, 10). Through this interpretation, Kuhn constructs the argument that possessing the ability to convince other scientists to agree with a novel proposal serves as the most crucial aspect for establishing scientific advancement. Kuhn reasons that the task of discovering “one full, objective, true account of nature” remains to be highly improbable (Kuhn...
The issue shall discuss the various differences between science and other types of knowledge and discuss the argument whether the science can rely without the separate theories posted by non-scientific educational bodies. ...
Ever wonder how the world would be today only if our great researchers implemented a different attitude towards their experiments? It is possible that the results would remain same. However, some argue that the consequences may be altered. Nonetheless, this does not make the earlier learned knowledge valued less or false, just supplementary. Abraham Maslow’s theory challenges nearly all ways of knowing, suggesting that if we limit our thinking, the outcomes remain homogenous, therefore, limiting the amount of knowledge we acquire. Dilemmas are mentioned in order to repudiate from the opinions that are profoundly accepted in the society. If Newton had eaten that apple, instead of using it as a tool to apply the theory of attraction, he may not have exposed gravity. Because he had more tools than a mere hammer and he was sagacious enough to expand his philosophy beyond hunger, he made such an innovation. It is widely claimed that inventions are accidental. In fact, all the chemical elements in the famous periodic table are a result of different tactics towards scientist’s research. As ToK teaches us that there is no possible end to a situation for it is influenced by the perceptive skills of the arguers. There is never a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ or the ‘ultimate answer’ in the conflict, but the eminence of rationalization is what poises the deliberation. This suggestion explains that there is always that one more way to approach the conclusion. Thus, pursuit of knowledge habitually requires dissimilar ways of knowing for it lengthens the verdict.
Beginning with the scientific revolution in the fifteen hundreds, the Western world has become accustomed to accepting knowledge that is backed by the scientific method, a method that has been standardized worldwide for the most accurate results. This method allows people to believe that the results achieved from an experiment conducted using the scientific method have been properly and rigorously tested and must therefore be the closest to truth. This method also allows for replication of any experiment with the same results, which further solidifies the credibility and standing of natural science in the world. Another aspect that allows for the reliability on the natural sciences is the current paradigm boxes, which skew the truth to remove anomalies. This affects the outcome of experiments as the hypotheses will be molded to create results that fit the paradigm box.
By the definition, science is the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment (Oxford dictionary). This crude definition is elaborated further by a world-famous sociologist Anthony Giddens as ‘the scientific study of human social life, groups, and societies. It is dazzling and compelling enterprise, as its subject matter is our own behavior as social beings. The scope of sociological study is extremely wide, ranging from the analysis of passing encounters between individuals on the street to the investigation of global social processes such as the rise of Islamic fundamentalism.’ (Giddens: 2006)