DOCSLIB.ORG

The Social Organisation of Science As a Question for Philosophy of Science

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Social Organisation of Science As a Question for Philosophy of Science JAANA EIGI The Social Organisation of Science as a Question for Philosophy of Science University of Tartu 2016ŀ The dissertation has been accepted for defence of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Philosophy by the Council of the Institute of Philosophy and Semiotics, University of Tartu, on the 6 th of June 2016. Supervisor: Dr Endla Lõhkivi Opponent: Dr Kristina Rolin (University of Helsinki, Finland) Defence: the dissertation will be defended at the University of Tartu, Estonia, on the 17 th of August 2016, at 14.15, in the Senate Hall of the University of Tartu. The work on the dissertation has been supported by the Graduate School of Linguistics, Philosophy and Semiotics at the University of Tartu; the European Social Fund’s Doctoral Studies and Internationalisation Programme DoRa, which is carried out by Foundation Archimedes; the national scholarship programme Kristjan Jaak, which is funded and managed by Archimedes Foundation in collaboration with the Ministry of Education and Research; the Centre of Excellence in Estonian Studies (European Union, European Regional Development Fund) and the research projects IUT20-5 (Estonian Ministry of Education and Research) and PUT732 (Estonian Research Council). 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.......................................................................5 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................7 CHAPTER 1. PHILOSOPHY GONE SOCIAL ...................................10 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 10 1.2 Old traditions and urgent new beginnings...................................................................... 11 1.3 Responding to challenges............................................................................................... 13 1.4 Making meliorative proposals and justifying them........................................................ 17 1.5 Seeing science as practice .............................................................................................. 24 1.6 Conclusion...................................................................................................................... 26 CHAPTER 2. THE SOCIAL CHARACTER OF SCIENCE: SOCIAL VALUES AND SOCIAL INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE...................................................................................................28 2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 28 2.2 Science and social values: challenging the value-free ideal .......................................... 29 2.3 Science and social interactions: challenging cognitive individualism........................... 35 2.4 Proposals, possibilities and limitations .......................................................................... 39 2.5 Longino’s critical contextual empiricism....................................................................... 44 2.6 Conclusion...................................................................................................................... 52 CHAPTER 3. KITCHER’S ACCOUNT: FROM CARVING NATURE AT THE JOINTS TO UNCOVERING UNIDENTIFIABLE OPPRESSION.......................................................54 3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 54 3.2 The Advancement of Science......................................................................................... 55 3.2.1 The context and the questions ................................................................................. 55 3.2.2 Aims, progress and rationality ................................................................................ 56 3.2.3 The social organisation of science .......................................................................... 59 3.2.4 Taking stock ............................................................................................................ 60 3.3 Science, Truth, and Democracy ..................................................................................... 62 3.3.1 The context and the questions ................................................................................. 62 3.3.2 Scientific aims and progress.................................................................................... 63 3.3.3 The social organisation of science .......................................................................... 66 3.3.4 Taking stock ............................................................................................................ 68 3.4 Science in a Democratic Society.................................................................................... 70 3.4.1 The context and the questions ................................................................................. 70 3.4.2 Values...................................................................................................................... 71 3.4.3 The social organisation of the system of public knowledge ................................... 72 3.4.4 Taking stock ............................................................................................................ 75 3.5 Conclusion: a well-ordered system ................................................................................ 77 CHAPTER 4. A CRITIQUE OF KITCHER’S ACCOUNT: EXPERTS, KNOWLEDGE AND PARTICIPATION.........................80 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 80 4.2 Agreeing with Kitcher.................................................................................................... 81 4.3 Disagreeing with Kitcher ............................................................................................... 84 4.3.1 Introduction: a system of careful restrictions.......................................................... 84 4.3.2 Experts..................................................................................................................... 86 3 4.3.3 Expertise.................................................................................................................. 90 4.3.3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 90 4.3.3.2 Research directions, concepts and values ........................................................ 91 4.3.3.3 Local knowledge .............................................................................................. 97 4.3.3.4 An escape path?.............................................................................................. 102 4.3.4 Public participation ............................................................................................... 102 4.3.5 A diagnosis and an alternative .............................................................................. 110 4.4 Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 116 CHAPTER 5. APPROACHING THE SOCIAL ORGANISATION OF SCIENCE WITH LONGINO’S IDEAS ........................................117 5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 117 5.2 Underdetermination...................................................................................................... 118 5.3 Is Longino’s account of objectivity social?.................................................................. 121 5.3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 121 5.3.2 Biddle’s criticism .................................................................................................. 121 5.3.3 Objectivity, collective tacit knowledge and rule-following.................................. 123 5.3.4 Objectivity for “encumbered selves” .................................................................... 128 5.3.5 Conclusion............................................................................................................. 132 5.4 Using Longino’s account to discuss the social organisation of science....................... 133 5.5 Using Longino’s account to make philosophy of science political: why?................... 139 5.6 Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 144 CHAPTER 6. PHILOSOPHY GONE POLITICAL ..........................146 6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 146 6.2 Using Longino’s account to make philosophy of science political: how?................... 147 6.3 “Knowing things in common”: Jasanoff on civic epistemologies ............................... 154 6.3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 154 6.3.2 Knowledge society and “knowing things in common”......................................... 155 6.3.3 Petunias and public participation .......................................................................... 158 6.3.4 Philosophical implications .................................................................................... 163 6.3.5 Conclusion............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Philosophy of Science -----Paulk
    PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE -----PAULK. FEYERABEND----- However, it has also a quite decisive role in building the new science and in defending new theories against their well-entrenched predecessors. For example, this philosophy plays a most important part in the arguments about the Copernican system, in the development of optics, and in the Philosophy ofScience: A Subject with construction of a new and non-Aristotelian dynamics. Almost every work of Galileo is a mixture of philosophical, mathematical, and physical prin~ a Great Past ciples which collaborate intimately without giving the impression of in­ coherence. This is the heroic time of the scientific philosophy. The new philosophy is not content just to mirror a science that develops independ­ ently of it; nor is it so distant as to deal just with alternative philosophies. It plays an essential role in building up the new science that was to replace 1. While it should be possible, in a free society, to introduce, to ex­ the earlier doctrines.1 pound, to make propaganda for any subject, however absurd and however 3. Now it is interesting to see how this active and critical philosophy is immoral, to publish books and articles, to give lectures on any topic, it gradually replaced by a more conservative creed, how the new creed gener­ must also be possible to examine what is being expounded by reference, ates technical problems of its own which are in no way related to specific not to the internal standards of the subject (which may be but the method scientific problems (Hurne), and how there arises a special subject that according to which a particular madness is being pursued), but to stan­ codifies science without acting back on it (Kant).
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy in Biology and Medicine: Biological Individuality and Fetal Parthood, Part I
    Oslo, Norway July 7–12, 2019 ISHP SS B BOOK OF ABSTRACTS 2 Index 11 Keynote lectures 17 Diverse format sessions 47 Traditional sessions 367 Individual papers 637 Mixed media and poster presentations A Aaby, Bendik Hellem, 369 Barbosa, Thiago Pinto, 82 Abbott, Jessica, 298 Barker, Matthew, 149 Abir-Am, Pnina Geraldine, 370 Barragán, Carlos Andrés, 391 D’Abramo, Flavio, 371 Battran, Martin, 158 Abrams, Marshall, 372 Bausman, William, 129, 135 Acerbi, Alberto, 156 Baxter, Janella, 56, 57 Ackert, Lloyd, 185 Bayir, Saliha, 536 Agiriano, Arantza Etxeberria, 374 Beasley, Charles, 392 Ahn, Soohyun, 148 Bechtel, William, 259 El Aichouchi, Adil, 375 Bedau, Mark, 393 Airoldi, Giorgio, 376 Ben-Shachar, Erela Teharlev, 395 Allchin, Douglas, 377 Beneduce, Chiara, 396 Allen, Gar, 328 Berry, Dominic, 56, 58 Almeida, Maria Strecht, 377 Bertoldi, Nicola, 397 Amann, Bernd, 40 Betzler, Riana, 398 Andersen, Holly, 19, 20 Bich, Leonardo, 41 Anderson, Gemma, 28 LeBihan, Soazig, 358 Angleraux, Caroline, 378 Birch, Jonathan, 22 Ankeny, Rachel A., 225 Bix, Amy Sue, 399 Anker, Peder, 230 Blais, Cédric, 401 Ardura, Adrian Cerda, 380 Blancke, Stefaan, 609 Armstrong-Ingram, Tiernan, 381 Blell, Mwenza, 488 Arnet, Evan, 383 Blute, Marion, 59, 62 Artiga, Marc, 383 Bognon-Küss, Cécilia, 23 Atanasova, Nina, 20, 21 Bokulich, Alisa, 616 Au, Yin Chung, 384 Bollhagen, Andrew, 402 DesAutels, Lane, 386 Bondarenko, Olesya, 403 Aylward, Alex, 109 Bonilla, Jorge Armando Romo, 404 B Baccelliere, Gabriel Vallejos, 387 Bonnin, Thomas, 405 Baedke, Jan, 49, 50 Boon, Mieke, 235 Baetu,
    [Show full text]
  • PDF Download Starting with Science Strategies for Introducing Young Children to Inquiry 1St Edition Ebook
    STARTING WITH SCIENCE STRATEGIES FOR INTRODUCING YOUNG CHILDREN TO INQUIRY 1ST EDITION PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Marcia Talhelm Edson | 9781571108074 | | | | | Starting with Science Strategies for Introducing Young Children to Inquiry 1st edition PDF Book The presentation of the material is as good as the material utilizing star trek analogies, ancient wisdom and literature and so much more. Using Multivariate Statistics. Michael Gramling examines the impact of policy on practice in early childhood education. Part of a series on. Schauble and colleagues , for example, found that fifth grade students designed better experiments after instruction about the purpose of experimentation. For example, some suggest that learning about NoS enables children to understand the tentative and developmental NoS and science as a human activity, which makes science more interesting for children to learn Abd-El-Khalick a ; Driver et al. Research on teaching and learning of nature of science. The authors begin with theory in a cultural context as a foundation. What makes professional development effective? Frequently, the term NoS is utilised when considering matters about science. This book is a documentary account of a young intern who worked in the Reggio system in Italy and how she brought this pedagogy home to her school in St. Taking Science to School answers such questions as:. The content of the inquiries in science in the professional development programme was based on the different strands of the primary science curriculum, namely Living Things, Energy and Forces, Materials and Environmental Awareness and Care DES Exit interview. Begin to address the necessity of understanding other usually peer positions before they can discuss or comment on those positions.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Berkeley Recent Work
    UC Berkeley Recent Work Title Emotional Meaning Making with Data Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5nn8m5nj Author Howell, Noura Publication Date 2020-04-01 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Emotional Meaning Making with Data by Noura Howell Adissertationsubmittedinpartialsatisfactionofthe requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Information Management and Systems and the Designated Emphasis in New Media in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Associate Professor Kimiko Ryokai, Chair Professor John Chuang Associate Professor Greg Niemeyer Associate Professor Abigail De Kosnik Spring 2020 1 Abstract Emotional Meaning Making with Data by Noura Howell Doctor of Philosophy in Information Management and Systems in School of Information and the Designated Emphasis in New Media University of California, Berkeley Associate Professor Kimiko Ryokai, Chair How many steps did you take today? Counting steps may seem like a clear-cut number, but this number is embroiled in bigger goals around health, broadly conceived, how we feel about our bodies, behavior, and lifestyle. We engage these issues on a personal level while also influenced by social relationships and societal narratives. Technologies such as step- counters influence what “counts”, or what seems important, valid, or worthwhile. In addition to step counts, other physiological sensors are increasingly embedded in wearables, walls, and furniture, producing data–implicitly deciding what “counts”–about people’s bodies, behaviors, and even claiming to measure thoughts and feelings. My work in this space starts from the simple yet often-overlooked observation that these are embodied social and emotional issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Robert Klee and the Latest Face of Scientific Realism P. Kyle Stanford
    Pergamon Stud. Hist. Phil. Sci., Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 367–375, 1999 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved Printed in Great Britain 0039-3681/99 $ - see front matter Essay Review Preaching to the Choir? Robert Klee and the Latest Face of Scientific Realism P. Kyle Stanford* Robert Klee, Introduction to the Philosophy of Science: Cutting Nature at its Seams (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), xi ϩ 258 pp., ISBN 0- 19-5106113, paperback. Perhaps the most important point to make about Robert Klee’s recent Introduc- tion to the Philosophy of Science: Cutting Nature at its Seams is that we need many more books like it: it is an engaging, accessible and comprehensive introduc- tory text in the philosophy of science which manages to avoid sailing over the head of the beginner philosophy student without talking down to the working pro- fessional. I suspect that many teachers of the philosophy of science will, along with their students, find something in this book to stimulate their own thinking about the subject. Despite its many strengths, however, the book’s central strategy of argument is, as we shall see, compromised by a fundamental weakness. One particularly impressive feature of the text is its effective use of immunology as a case study. Klee’s first chapter presents the basics of immunological science, and it serves him well as a constant source of illustration throughout the text. As Klee notes, this pedagogical strategy avoids the traditional exclusive focus on the (sometimes idiosyncratic) features of physics. Far more importantly, however, it avoids the classic philosopher’s mistake of testing accounts of science against a high-school textbook reconstruction of scientific activity, rather than the sophisticated, complex, richly detailed and messy business in which real science consists.
    [Show full text]
  • Objectivity in the Feminist Philosophy of Science
    OBJECTIVITY IN THE FEMINIST PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requisites for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Karen Cordrick Haely, M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 2003 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Louise M. Antony, Adviser Professor Donald C. Hubin _______________________ Professor George Pappas Adviser Philosophy Graduate Program ABSTRACT According to a familiar though naïve conception, science is a rigorously neutral enterprise, free from social and cultural influence, but more sophisticated philosophical views about science have revealed that cultural and personal interests and values are ubiquitous in scientific practice, and thus ought not be ignored when attempting to understand, describe and prescribe proper behavior for the practice of science. Indeed, many theorists have argued that cultural and personal interests and values must be present in science (and knowledge gathering in general) in order to make sense of the world. The concept of objectivity has been utilized in the philosophy of science (as well as in epistemology) as a way to discuss and explore the various types of social and cultural influence that operate in science. The concept has also served as the focus of debates about just how much neutrality we can or should expect in science. This thesis examines feminist ideas regarding how to revise and enrich the concept of objectivity, and how these suggestions help achieve both feminist and scientific goals. Feminists offer us warnings about “idealized” concepts of objectivity, and suggest that power can play a crucial role in determining which research programs get labeled “objective”.
    [Show full text]
  • Fehr, “What Is in It for Me? the Benefits of Diversity in Scientific
    Chapter 7 What Is in It for Me? The Benefits of Diversity in Scientific Communities Carla Fehr Abstract I investigate the reciprocal relationship between social accounts of knowledge production and efforts to increase the representation of women and some minorities in the academy. In particular, I consider the extent to which femi- nist social epistemologies such as Helen Longino’s critical contextual empiricism can be employed to argue that it is in researchers’ epistemic interest to take active steps to increase gender diversity. As it stands, critical contextual empiricism does not provide enough resources to succeed at this task. However, considering this view through an employment equity lens highlights areas where such theories need to be further developed. I argue that views such as Longino’s ought to attend to nuances of community structure and cultural features that inhibit critical social interactions, if we are to maximize the epistemic as well as the ethical improvements associated with a social approach to knowing. These developments advance these epistemic theories for their own sake. They also help develop these theories into a tool that can be used by those calling for increased diversity in the academy. Keywords Feminist philosophy of science • Social epistemology • Implicit bias • Employment equity • Workplace environment issues 7.1 What Is in It for Me? A while ago I gave a lecture to science faculty members and university administrators regarding the underrepresentation of women and minorities in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields.1 After my talk, an administrator, with 1 In this paper I am primarily focusing on gender diversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Toward an Engaged Account of Objectivity: Contributions from Early Phenomenology
    Toward an Engaged Account of Objectivity: Contributions from Early Phenomenology Author: Amanda Gibeault Persistent link: http://hdl.handle.net/2345/730 This work is posted on eScholarship@BC, Boston College University Libraries. Boston College Electronic Thesis or Dissertation, 2009 Copyright is held by the author, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise noted. ! ∀# ∃%∃&∋ ∃! ∃∀( )&∗ ( ) & + ( ∃ !) + , −../ 0 +( ∃ !) −../ ! ∀# ∃%∃&∋ ∃! ∃∀( )&∗ ( ) & + ∃ 1∃2 +321 45 6∃ 45 +1 ++ 72 1 18 +426∃ 8 6∀1∃ 54 2+326∃ 72+321 45 61∃ 1 +326 5 5 + 2+ 9215 5+ +326 1∃ 2 ∗) :815 +32 ,6∗ 1+, 2 6∃2 54 ;15 ∃∗ 6∀1∃+ +81 22251 +326 251 ,+325 2214 281+121 ,6∃ 1∃ + 5 +326 ! ∀ #∃ % ∀ &∋( ) ∗ ∀ %+ ∀ %, %∀ % ∃ %− +∀ + +% ,∀ . +, /∀ 0 +− ∀ 1 23 +4 %∀ . 5 . 6 +! +∀ ∃ 7 8 8 9 ,: ,∀ 3 3; , −∀ 3 6 < 3 ,% /∀ / ,+ ∀ & 3 ,+ %∀ 6∋ . ,∗ +∀ = ∃ >1 2 −% 3 ∀ ( ∃ −, ∀ −∗ ,∀ / −! /∀ 4% % 3 4, ∀ 6 & 4∗ ∀ ? 4∗ %∀ 6 4≅ +∀ 0 . ∗: ,∀ 6∃ 3 6 ∗ ∀ 1 ? 0 & ∗, ∀ ? !− /∀ 7 <∃ 8> 8& ≅, /∀ :+ + ; 3 :4 ∀ ; 3 0 :∗ ∀ Α . ∃ . :! ∋ %∀ 76;1 81 8 % 1 ∀ ; 3 − ∀ ∋ 8∃85 − %∀ 7 5 ∃ ∗ +∀ ; 3 %∗ ,∀ +: ∀ 1 6 +− ∀ 6 +4 %∀ 6 ,: +∀ =3 , ,∀ 6 ; 3 ,% /∀ ,4 ,∃?(6 −: ∀ 6 6 −% ∀ 4: ∀ ∗: ∀ ∗: %∀ ∗− /∀ = ∗≅ ∀ = ∗≅ %∀ = ! +∀ & = !− /∀ 3) 3 !! ∀ 6 ≅% /∀ 6 ≅, /∀ ≅∗ − 6 ≅! ∀ 0 %: ∀ .∃ %:− ∀ %:− %∀ % +∀ = 6∃ %+ ,∀ 66 %≅
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophical Adventures
    Philosophical Adventures Elisabeth A. Lloyd INDIANA UNIVERSITY John Dewey lecture delivered at the one hundred tenth annual Central Division meeting of the American Philosophical Association in New Orleans, Louisiana, on February 21, 2013. I had the lovely opportunity of being introduced by Alison Wylie, to whom I owe a large thank you, and thank you especially to Anne Jacobson, and the whole program committee, for this chance to share a bit of my life and career with you. This invitation charged that I was to give an “autobiographical sort” of talk. Specifically, it required the speaker to provide “an intellectual autobiography, with perhaps some account of the way in which [she] was shaped by or shaped the profession, how the profession seems to have changed over the years, etc. The lecturer might reflect on the people and issues that led [her] into philosophy and provide a personal perspective on the state of the field today.” I tried to stick pretty closely to this mandate. Over the course of my career, which is now—although I find this astounding—over thirty years long, I have had the great pleasure of seeing my primary field of research grow and establish itself as a serious field of thought and activity in philosophy. When I was in graduate school at Princeton in the early 1980s, I was told, and I quote, “there is no such thing as Philosophy of Biology. You can’t write a dissertation on that.” And John Beatty wrote that same year: “In the world of academic specialties and subspecialties, philosophy of biology certainly counts as a self-respecting, if not otherwise respected, field of study.”1 It is impossible to imagine anyone saying that now! Five years later, I was also told that feminist philosophy of science was hopeless, that there were no good cases of male bias in science worth discussing, and that since science was self- correcting, those sorts of bias couldn’t have any long-term significance.
    [Show full text]
  • Sounding Situated Knowledges
    Title Sounding Situated Knowledges - Echo in Archaeoacoustics Type Article URL https://ualresearchonline.arts.ac.uk/id/eprint/15312/ Dat e 2 0 1 7 Citation Goh, Annie (2017) Sounding Situated Knowledges - Echo in Archaeoacoustics. Parallax, 23 (3). pp. 283-304. ISSN 1 3 5 3-4 6 4 5 Cr e a to rs Goh, Annie Usage Guidelines Please refer to usage guidelines at http://ualresearchonline.arts.ac.uk/policies.html or alternatively contact [email protected] . License: Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives Unless otherwise stated, copyright owned by the author Articles Sounding Situated Knowledges: Echo in Archaeoacoustics 1. Introduction What is at stake in considering how sound and listening produce knowledge? This article proposes that sound studies, largely occupied with theorizing how knowledge is produced through sound and listening, requires a greater interrogation of the subject-object relation via feminist epistemologies. I draw on the language of science studies to understand all sound studies scholarship as some form of sonic knowledge production. Feminist epistemologies, positioned against a presumed neutrality in science and philosophy, have demonstrated the uncritical continuation of a traditional subject-object dualism to be a crude limitation on knowledge practices. Much of this work has taken the gesture of ‘opening up’ and asking how re-thinking commonly held notions can lead to new insights into existing paradigms.11 This has been articulated in Evelyn Fox Keller’s hugely influential work on gender and science where notions of the masculinist objectivity in Western science are analysed. Keller writes of her investigation into how a ‘different subjectivity […] would affect our conception of science’ and alludes to a goal of ‘enabling us to glimpse what a science less constrained by such an ideology might look like’.
    [Show full text]
  • WHAT's WRONG with the SOCIAL SCIENCES? the Perils of the Postmodern
    WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE SOCIAL SCIENCES? The Perils of the Postmodern Michael A. Faia College of William & Mary 1993 For Caitlin, Josephine, Gusty, and Pancho Et si je connais, moi, une fleur unique au monde, qui n'existe nulle part, sauf dans ma planète, et qu'un petit mouton peut anéantir d'un seul coup, comme ça, un matin, sans se rendre compte de ce qu'il fait, ce n'est pas important ça! —Antoine de Saint-Exupéry iii Table of Contents Introduction Chapter 1: WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE SOCIAL SCIENCES? 1 (1) The dialectics of disenchantment 2 (1.1) Predictability, vulcanology, seismology, and (especially) meteorology 6 (1.2) Molecular mysteries and habits of the quark 8 (1.3) Rosaldo revisited: How would the catcher in the rye have felt? 12 (2) The trouble with feminist theory 13 (3) Titles and tribulations 17 (4) Solicitous gatekeepers, #1 25 (5) Itching and scratching: a Lazarsfeldian digression through an SPSS 27 hologram (6) Transcending the transcendentalists 30 (7) What do you presuppose, and when did you presuppose it? The Sisyphus of the social sciences 33 (8) The meaning of politics and the politics of meaning 38 Chapter 2: MICHEL FOUCAULT, MACHINES WHO THINK, AND THE HUMAN SCIENCES 57 (1) “Man the machine—man the impersonal engine” 57 (2) Good, bad, or ugly? 67 (3) Mitigating circumstances 70 iv (4) In conclusion: Oodles of Boodles 74 (5) Why Foucault needed Lindroth, and why Lindroth needed Foucault 75 Chapter 3: IN PRAISE OF THE NULL HYPOTHESIS: THE MYTH OF “THE VALUE-FREE MYTH” 83 (1) The nature and extent of bias in scientific research 83 (2) Quashing the indictment: Can a Comtean rule a country? 85 (2.1) Positions 86 (2.2) Correctives 87 (2.3) Motives: A series of acts contrary ..
    [Show full text]
  • Norms of Testimony in Broad Interdisciplinarity: the Case of Quantum Mechanics in Critical Theory
    Journal for General Philosophy of Science https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-020-09523-5 ARTICLE Norms of Testimony in Broad Interdisciplinarity: The Case of Quantum Mechanics in Critical Theory Rasmus Jaksland1 © The Author(s) 2020 Abstract While much interdisciplinarity brings together proximate felds, broad interdisciplinarity sees integration between disciplines that are perceived to be non-neighboring. This paper argues that the heterogeneity among disciplines in broad interdisciplinarity calls for stricter epistemic norms of testimony for experts that act as translators between the disciplines than those suggested for intra-scientifc testimony. The paper is structured around two case studies: the afective turn in social theorizing and the use of quantum mechanics in critical theory as exemplifed by Vicky Kirby’s use of work by Karen Barad. These are argued to be instances of broad interdisciplinary borrowing where few translators have joint expertise in both disciplines. For most, therefore, the engagement with for instance the integration between quantum mechanics and critical theory is possible only by the aid of translators. For those without sufcient interactional expertise, however, the epistemic credentials of the translations they inevitably rely upon are inscrutable. Furthermore, any comparison between translations is challenged since translations are argued to be few due to the cog- nitive divergence between disciplines in broad interdisciplinarity. Consequently, the epis- temic integrity of broad interdisciplinarity can only be secured through additional norms of testimony for translators. The paper proposes that (a) all translator’s testimony in broad interdisciplinarity must aim to be neutral with respect to disputed issues within the relevant disciplines and (b) any deviation from (a) must be clearly highlighted.
    [Show full text]