DOCSLIB.ORG

Theoretical Tools for Integrating Cognitive and Social Studies of Science Christophe Heintz

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Theoretical Tools for Integrating Cognitive and Social Studies of Science Christophe Heintz Scientific cognition and cultural evolution: theoretical tools for integrating cognitive and social studies of science Christophe Heintz To cite this version: Christophe Heintz. Scientific cognition and cultural evolution: theoretical tools for integrating cog- nitive and social studies of science. Social Anthropology and ethnology. Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (EHESS), 2007. English. tel-00145899 HAL Id: tel-00145899 https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00145899 Submitted on 12 May 2007 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Christophe HEINTZ COGNITION SCIENTIFIQUE ET EVOLUTION´ CULTURELLE Outils th´eoriquespour incorporer les ´etudes cognitives aux ´etudessociales de la science Doctorat nouveau regime´ Discipline : PHILOSOPHIE ET SCIENCES SOCIALES Directeur de these` : M. Dan SPERBER, Directeur de recherche, CNRS Jury de these` : M. Daniel ANDLER, Professeur, Universite´ de Paris-Sorbonne M. Bernard CONEIN, Professeur, Nice-Sophia Antipolis M. Jer´ omeˆ DOKIC, Directeur d’etudes,´ EHESS M. David GOODING, Professeur, University of Bath E´ COLE DES HAUTES E´ TUDES EN SCIENCES SOCIALES Mai 2007 Resum´ e´ Cette these` preconise´ d’utiliser des outils theoriques´ de l’anthropologie cognitive pour l’etude´ scientifique de la science. Ces outils sont l’epid´ emio-´ logie des representations,´ developp´ ee´ par Dan Sperber, et l’etude´ de la cognition distribuee,´ telle qu’elle a` et´ e´ developp´ ee´ par Ed Hutchins. Ces deux theories,´ qui sont par ailleurs etroitement´ liees,´ ont pour apport es- sentiel de permettre d’integrer´ les etudes´ cognitives et sociales de la science. Deux etudes´ d’histoire des mathematiques´ illustrent le potentiel explica- tif de ces theories´ : le developpement´ du calcul infinitesimal´ en France au debut´ du 18eme` siecle,` et l’avenement` des ordinateurs dans la pratique des mathematiques,´ marque´ par la preuve du theor´ eme` des quatre couleurs. Les etudes´ cognitives de la science commencent depuis peu a` prendre au serieux´ le caractere` social de la production scientifique. Je m’inscris dans les developpements´ recents´ de ces travaux, tout en soulignant l’apport dis- tinct d’une anthropologie cognitive de la science : considerer´ la science comme un phenom´ ene` culturel, qui par la` memeˆ implique des processus mentaux, et peut donc ben´ eficier´ d’une approche cognitive. La premiere` partie fait un recensement des principes methodologiques,´ theoriques´ et philosophiques qui permettent et trop souvent entravent l’etude´ integr´ ee´ des phenom´ enes` mentaux et sociaux de la production scientifique. C’est finalement les travaux du Programme Fort qui, tout en montrant la na- ture sociale de la science, se rev´ ele` le plus a` memeˆ d’incorporer des ana- lyses cognitives basees´ sur des resultats´ de la psychologie cognitive et evolutionniste.´ La deuxieme` partie s’attache aux bases psychologiques de la rationalite´ scientifique, que les sociologues des sciences ont decrite´ comme changeante et relative au contexte social. Des theories´ recentes´ de la psy- iv chologie cognitive montrent que l’esprit humain est richement dote´ de ca- pacites´ cognitives universelles fortement determin´ ees´ par les contraintes gen´ etiques´ sur le developpement´ du cerveau. Comment reconcilier´ l’uni- versalisme de ces capacites´ psychologiques, qui constituent ensemble la rationalite´ humaine, et l’observation de la variabilite´ des normes de ra- tionalite´ scientifique ? Considerer´ ces deux rationalites´ comme distinctes, c’est reconnaˆıtre que la nature de l’appareil cognitif humain joue un roleˆ fondamental dans la formation des croyances scientifiques, mais sous- determine´ le contenu de ces croyances. J’analyse les mecanismes´ men- taux qui permettent aux scientifiques d’inscrire leurs reflexions´ dans un contexte culturel (par le biais de cadres interpretatifs),´ tout en exploitant les capacites´ d’inferences´ de l’appareil cognitif humain. Ces mecanismes´ sont present´ es´ comme des moments essentiels dans les chaˆınes de rela- tions causales de la production des representations´ scientifiques. Ils sont situes´ a` l’interieur´ de ces chaˆınes qui comprennent des actes de communi- cation, de perception, et d’experimentation,´ et mettent en jeux - et c’est le theme` de la partie suivante - de multiples acteurs et artefacts.´ La cognition scientifique est distribuee´ de maniere` systematique´ entre des scientifiques specialis´ es´ et des artefacts ; elle est organisee´ dans les systemes` de cogni- tion distribuee´ que forment les institutions scientifiques. La troisieme` par- tie de la these` analyse les pratiques scientifiques comme ayant une fonc- tion cognitive au sein de systemes` de cognition distribuee.´ Comprendre l’evolution´ de ces pratiques, c’est alors comprendre pourquoi et comment les systeme` de cognition distribuee´ changent ou perdurent. Je souligne le roleˆ de certaines representations´ qui regulent´ le fonctionnement des institutions scientifiques en attribuant des fonctions cognitives a` certains el´ ements,´ qu’ils soient humains ou non. Ces ’representations´ regulatives’´ sont en fait des croyances sur les moyens de production de la connaissance scientifiques : l’organisation des institutions scientifiques evolue´ lorsqu’un scientifique se propose d’utiliser les representations´ produites par un el´ e-´ ment cognitif qu’il juge suffisamment fiable. Une etude´ epid´ emiologique´ sur la distribution des representations´ de fiabilite´ cognitive contribue a` ex- pliquer l’evolution´ des institutions scientifiques, et par ce biais, l’evolution´ v des pratiques et de la connaissance scientifique. Il y a donc differents´ meca-´ nismes qui distribuent les representations´ scientifiques, pour gen´ erer´ le phenom´ ene` culturel qu’est l’evolution´ de la science. Je m’attache dans cette these` a` decrire´ certains mecanismes´ mentaux dans la formation de croyance des scientifiques et certains mecanismes´ sociaux dans la forma- tion des institutions scientifiques. Mais il se rev´ ele` que ces mecanismes´ s’inscrivent toujours a` l’interieur´ de chaˆınes causales qui incluent pro- cessus mentaux et interactions sociales. Des etudes´ integrant´ les aspects cognitifs et sociaux sont donc necessaires´ ; et je tente de contribuer a` leur developpement´ en articulant theories´ de sociologie des sciences et theories´ de psychologie cognitive dans le but de mieux apprehender´ l’histoire des sciences. vi Table des matieres` Premiere` partie : Objectifs et moyens en vue de l’integration´ des etudes´ cognitives et sociales de la science 1. Introduction 2. Les recherches integr´ ees´ en science de la science 3. Integrer´ le Programme Fort en sociologie des sciences Deuxieme` partie : Psychologie et historicite´ de la science 4. Rationalite´ et pensee´ scientifique 5. Theories´ nativistes pour la science de la science 6. Epid´ emiologie´ des representations´ scientifiques 7. Cognition mathematique´ et histoire : etude´ epid´ emiologique´ de la notion d’infinitesimal´ Troisieme` partie : L’organisation culturelle de la cognition scientifique 8. Les systemes` de cognition distribuee´ en science 9. L’organisation sociale de la cognition 10. L’evolution´ des systemes` de cognition distribuee´ 11. Distribuer la cognition mathematique´ : le cas du theor´ eme` des quatre couleurs Quatrieme` partie : En queteˆ d’un modele` causal et integr´ e´ pour la science de la science 12. Comment remettre a` jour l’epist´ emologie´ evolutionniste´ ? Les mecanismes´ cognitifs et sociaux de la production de connaissances scientifiques viii Christophe HEINTZ Scientific cognition and cultural evolution: theoretical tools for integrating social and cognitive studies of science Ph.D Thesis, EHESS, Paris May 2007 Keywords: cognition and culture, science—social aspects—cognitive aspects, historiography, history of mathematics—case studies An electronic version of this document is available at: http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/thesis x Contents Preface xvii I Motives and means for integrating cognitive and so- cial studies of science1 1 Introduction3 1.1 The social and the cognitive...................4 1.2 Means of integration.......................5 1.3 Theoretical claims about the principles of scientific evolution7 1.4 Organisation of the thesis....................9 2 Cognitive studies of science and the social 11 2.1 Why integrating social and cognitive studies of science... 13 2.2 Impediments to integration................... 16 2.2.1 Philosophers’ qualms about social determination.. 18 2.2.2 Homo-economicus, homo-scientificus......... 19 2.2.3 When foundational concerns get in the way..... 21 2.2.4 Psychology and the myth of the isolated scientist.. 26 2.3 Integrative projects........................ 29 2.3.1 Cognitive history of science............... 31 2.3.2 Environmental approaches............... 33 2.3.3 The psychology of social studies............ 35 2.4 Cognitive anthropology of science............... 36 xii CONTENTS 3 Integrating the Strong Programme 45 3.1 The Strong Programme and its attitude towards psychology 46 3.1.1 The symmetry
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Modularity As a Concept Modern Ideas About Mental Modularity Typically Use Fodor (1983) As a Key Touchstone
    COGNITIVE PROCESSING International Quarterly of Cognitive Science Mental modularity, metaphors, and the marriage of evolutionary and cognitive sciences GARY L. BRASE University of Missouri – Columbia Abstract - As evolutionary approaches in the behavioral sciences become increasingly prominent, issues arising from the proposition that the mind is a collection of modular adaptations (the multi-modular mind thesis) become even more pressing. One purpose of this paper is to help clarify some valid issues raised by this thesis and clarify why other issues are not as critical. An aspect of the cognitive sciences that appears to both promote and impair progress on this issue (in different ways) is the use of metaphors for understand- ing the mind. Utilizing different metaphors can yield different perspectives and advancement in our understanding of the nature of the human mind. A second purpose of this paper is to outline the kindred natures of cognitive science and evolutionary psychology, both of which cut across traditional academic divisions and engage in functional analyses of problems. Key words: Evolutionary Theory, Cognitive Science, Modularity, Metaphors Evolutionary approaches in the behavioral sciences have begun to influence a wide range of fields, from cognitive neuroscience (e.g., Gazzaniga, 1998), to clini- cal psychology (e.g., Baron-Cohen, 1997; McGuire and Troisi, 1998), to literary theory (e.g., Carroll, 1999). At the same time, however, there are ongoing debates about the details of what exactly an evolutionary approach – often called evolu- tionary psychology— entails (Holcomb, 2001). Some of these debates are based on confusions of terminology, implicit arguments, or misunderstandings – things that can in principle be resolved by clarifying current ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Relevance STEPHEN C
    J. Linguistics 25 (1989), 455-472. Printed in Great Britain REVIEW ARTICLE A review of Relevance STEPHEN C. LEVINSON Department of Linguistics, University of Cambridge (Received 31 March 1989) Dan Sperber & Deirdre Wilson, Relevance: communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell, 1986. Pp. viii + 279. In this bold and highly controversial book, Sperber and Wilson attempt to shift the whole centre of gravity of pragmatic theory by locating it firmly in a general theory of cognition. Outlining that general theory takes the bulk of the book, so those who have followed technical developments in pragmatics will not find those issues much advanced here. For the purpose of the book is otherwise, to outline a single cognitive principle which (it is held) will give us, along with a theory of attention, almost all we need in the way of a theory of communication, such a theory in turn having linguistic applications merely sketched here.1 The book is written in a fluid argumentative style; easy to read, it is not easy to understand, presuming much that the central thesis depends on. Perhaps because of the global and speculative aims, there is little or no reference to recent developments in the theory of meaning.2 This book has already aroused much passion for and much passion against. Cited by its authors as long ago as 1979, the ideas have been trailered in a series of articles, with both critics and protagonists taking up provocative positions (see for example the still useful exchange in Smith, 1982). Thus when the book finally appeared, extensive airings of these passions were inevitable (see the peer review in Behavioral and Brain Sciences (BBS) 10 (1987), or the exchange in Journal of Semantics 5 (1988)).3 The views have [1] A second and third volume on pragmatics and rhetoric were projected (vii-viii) and this reviewer had hoped for some glimpse of these applications before passing judgment on a disembodied principle, as it were.
    [Show full text]
  • In Defense of Massive Modularity
    3 In Defense of Massive Modularity Dan Sperber In October 1990, a psychologist, Susan Gelman, and three anthropolo- gists whose interest in cognition had been guided and encouraged by Jacques Mehler, Scott Atran, Larry Hirschfeld, and myself, organized a conference on “Cultural Knowledge and Domain Specificity” (see Hirsch- feld and Gelman, 1994). Jacques advised us in the preparation of the conference, and while we failed to convince him to write a paper, he did play a major role in the discussions. A main issue at stake was the degree to which cognitive development, everyday cognition, and cultural knowledge are based on dedicated do- main-specific mechanisms, as opposed to a domain-general intelligence and learning capacity. Thanks in particular to the work of developmental psychologists such as Susan Carey, Rochel Gelman, Susan Gelman, Frank Keil, Alan Leslie, Jacques Mehler, Elizabeth Spelke (who were all there), the issue of domain-specificity—which, of course, Noam Chomsky had been the first to raise—was becoming a central one in cognitive psychol- ogy. Evolutionary psychology, represented at the conference by Leda Cosmides and John Tooby, was putting forward new arguments for seeing human cognition as involving mostly domain- or task-specific evolved adaptations. We were a few anthropologists, far from the main- stream of our discipline, who also saw domain-specific cognitive pro- cesses as both constraining and contributing to cultural development. Taking for granted that domain-specific dispositions are an important feature of human cognition, three questions arise: 1. To what extent are these domain-specific dispositions based on truly autonomous mental mechanisms or “modules,” as opposed to being 48 D.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Sperber & Wilson 1986. Relevance: Communication And
    Review of Sperber & Wilson 1986. Relevance : Communication and Cognition Daniel Hirst To cite this version: Daniel Hirst. Review of Sperber & Wilson 1986. Relevance : Communication and Cognition. Mind and Language, Wiley, 1989, 4 (1/2), pp.138-146. hal-02552695 HAL Id: hal-02552695 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02552695 Submitted on 23 Apr 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Review of Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson (1986) Relevance : Communication and Cognition. (Blackwell's, Oxford) Daniel Hirst - CNRS Parole et Langage, Université de Provence. One of the examples Sperber & Wilson ask us to consider is the sentence : "It took us a long time to write this book" (p 122) In case the reader misses the point, they explain in the preface that the book developped out of a project begun over ten years ago to write "in a few months" a joint essay on semantics, pragmatics and rhetoric. The resulting book has been long awaited, having been announced as "forthcoming" since at least 1979 under various provisional titles ranging from The Interpretation of Utterances : Semantics, Pragmatics & Rhetoric (Wilson & Sperber 1979) through Foundations of Pragmatic Theory (Wilson & Sperber 1981) to Language and Relevance (Wilson & Sperber 1985).
    [Show full text]
  • 7 Relevance Theory and Shared Content Herman Cappelen and Ernie Lepore
    7 relevance theory and shared content herman cappelen and ernie lepore Speakers share content when they make the same assertion (claim, conjecture, proposal, etc). They also share content when they propose (entertain, discuss, etc.) the same hypothesis, theory, and thought. And again when they evaluate whether what each says (thinks, claims, suggests, etc.) is true, false, interesting, obscene, original or offensive. Content sharing, so understood, is the very foundation of communication. Relevance theory (RT), however, implies that content sharing is impossible; or at least, we will argue as much in what follows. This chapte is divided into three sections. In section 1, we amplify on what we mean by ‘shared content’ and its roles in how we think about language and communication; we discuss various strategies RT might invoke to account for shared content and why all these strategies fail. Section 2 is exegetical; there we show why RT must deny the possibility of shared content. The denial is a direct consequence of some of the most central tenets of RT. It is, however, a consequence downplayed by RT proponents. Our goal in section 2 is to show how central the denial of shared content is to RT. In section 3 we outline how we think a pragmatic theory should account for shared content. question: good enough? According to RT, interpreters follow ‘the least effort strategy’ (LES): (LES) Check interpretive hypotheses in order of their accessibility, that is, follow a path of least effort, until an interpretation which satisfi es the expectation of relevance is found; then stop. (Carston 2001, 6) In section 2 we elaborate on how exactly to interpret (LES) and its RT defence.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Constructivism and Technology in Instructional Technology and Teacher Education Muktha B
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 1999 Theory into practice: social constructivism and technology in instructional technology and teacher education Muktha B. Jost Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the Communication Technology and New Media Commons, Curriculum and Instruction Commons, Instructional Media Design Commons, and the Teacher Education and Professional Development Commons Recommended Citation Jost, Muktha B., "Theory into practice: social constructivism and technology in instructional technology and teacher education " (1999). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 12202. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/12202 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
    [Show full text]
  • Studia Politica 42015
    www.ssoar.info The politics of international relations: building bridges and the quest for relevance Braun, Aurel Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Braun, A. (2015). The politics of international relations: building bridges and the quest for relevance. Studia Politica: Romanian Political Science Review, 15(4), 557-566. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-51674-8 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer CC BY-NC-ND Lizenz This document is made available under a CC BY-NC-ND Licence (Namensnennung-Nicht-kommerziell-Keine Bearbeitung) zur (Attribution-Non Comercial-NoDerivatives). For more Information Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den CC-Lizenzen finden see: Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.de The Politics of International Relations Building Bridges and the Quest for Relevance 1 AUREL BRAUN The 21 st Century sadly is proving to be a volatile and violent one where the hopes of the immediate years of the post-Cold War era have proven to be ephemeral. International Relations, (IR) at first blush, appears to be ideally positioned as a discipline to help us understand or even cope with the extreme dissonance of the international system. A discreet academic field for a century now, but in fact one of the oldest approaches, IR seems to brim with promise to offer explanation, identify causality and enable cogent prediction. After all, in an era where we emphasize interdisciplinary studies and across-the-board approaches IR appears to be a compelling intellectual ecosystem.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief Overview of Alexander Wendt's Constructivism Written by Zhan Mengshu
    A Brief Overview of Alexander Wendt's Constructivism Written by Zhan Mengshu This PDF is auto-generated for reference only. As such, it may contain some conversion errors and/or missing information. For all formal use please refer to the official version on the website, as linked below. A Brief Overview of Alexander Wendt's Constructivism https://www.e-ir.info/2020/05/19/a-brief-overview-of-alexander-wendts-constructivism/ ZHAN MENGSHU, MAY 19 2020 For decades, the theory of International Relations was dominated by two approaches: realism and liberalism. Constructivism had been marginalized by these mainstream theories because it focused on social construction instead of material construction (Barkin, 2017). The turning point came late in the 1980s as the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War made people reconsider the explanatory ability of mainstream theories (Hopf, 1998). Consequently, a new debate emerged. Under this, the development of Alexander Wendt’s constructivist theory gained attention in academia and began to stand out (Lapid, 2007). Wendt published ‘Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics’ in 1992. In this paper he revealed the limitation of the concept of anarchy from the neorealist and neoliberal theories in explaining international relations (Wendt, 1992). In 1999 he further developed the theory in Social Theory of International Politics. In the book, Wendt opened up a moderate lane in the development of constructivist theory (Guzzin & Leander, 2001) and essentially created a ‘thin’ constructivism. That is, Wendt recognizes the main points of materialism and individualism, as well as a scientific methods of social inquiry.
    [Show full text]
  • A Hybrid Theory of Metaphor
    A Hybrid Theory of Metaphor Relevance Theory and Cognitive Linguistics Markus Tendahl A Hybrid Theory of Metaphor Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Taiwan eBook Consortium - PalgraveConnect - 2011-03-02 eBook Consortium - PalgraveConnect Taiwan - licensed to www.palgraveconnect.com material from Copyright 10.1057/9780230244313 - A Hybrid Theory of Metaphor, Markus Tendahl This page intentionally left blank Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Taiwan eBook Consortium - PalgraveConnect - 2011-03-02 eBook Consortium - PalgraveConnect Taiwan - licensed to www.palgraveconnect.com material from Copyright 10.1057/9780230244313 - A Hybrid Theory of Metaphor, Markus Tendahl A Hybrid Theory of Metaphor Relevance Theory and Cognitive Linguistics Markus Tendahl University of Dortmund, Germany Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Taiwan eBook Consortium - PalgraveConnect - 2011-03-02 eBook Consortium - PalgraveConnect Taiwan - licensed to www.palgraveconnect.com material from Copyright 10.1057/9780230244313 - A Hybrid Theory of Metaphor, Markus Tendahl © Markus Tendahl 2009 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No portion of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, Saffron House, 6-10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS. Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. The author has asserted his right to be identified as the author of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistic Returns: the Currency of Sceptical-Rhetorical Theory and Its Stylistic Inscription in the Platonic and Derridian Text
    Linguistic Returns: the currency of sceptical-rhetorical theory and its stylistic inscription in the Platonic and Derridian text by Monina Wittfoth B.A., The University of Toronto, 2000 M.A., The University of British Columbia, 2003 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in The Faculty of Graduate Studies (English) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) October 2010 © Monina Wittfoth, 2010 ii Abstract Based on the premise that modernity’s understanding of the linguistic sign has a long history dating back to ancient Greece when the linguistic mediation of knowledge preoccupied thinkers like Parmenides and Plato, this dissertation synthesizes contemporary post-structuralist and rhetorical understandings of language with like-minded findings of other fields of language study. It sees post-structuralist and deconstructive understandings of language as being congruent with the long tradition of rhetorical theory and the infamous linguistic turn in philosophy, that was initiated by the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, as a turn away from the actual phenomena of language towards an idealization of it. Nevertheless the thesis discovers recent findings by some of the beneficiaries of the “philosophy of language” that corroborate rhetorical theory’s insights. Inspired by both Derrida and Plato, this dissertation presents a rhetorical-deconstructive image of language that, recalling the root of the term skopevw (‘I look,’ ‘behold,’ ‘contemplate’), I characterize as sceptical.
    [Show full text]
  • Constructivism, Education, Science, and Technology
    Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology Volume 29(3) Fall / automne, 2003 Constructivism, Education, Science, and Technology Moses A. Boudourides Author Moses A. Boudourides is an Associate Professor in the Department of Mathematics of the University of Patras, Greece. His research interests include mathematical sociology, Internet research and Science & Technology Studies (STS). Communication regarding this article should be addressed to Dr. Moses A. Boudourides. Address: Mathematics Department, University of Patras, 265 00 Rio­ Patras, Greece. Phone/Fax: +30­2610­996318. E­mail: [email protected] Abstract Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to present a brief review of the various streams of constructivism in studies of education, society, science and technology. It is intended to present a number of answers to the question (what really is constructivism?) in the context of various disciplines from the humanities and the sciences (both natural and social). In particular the discussion will focus on four varieties of constructivism: philosophical, cybernetic, educational, and sociological constructivism. Résumé: Cet article a pour objectif de passer brièvement en revue les différents courants de constructivisme dans les études sur l'éducation, la société, la science et la technologie. Il a également pour intention d'offrir un certain nombre de réponses à la question « Qu'est­ce réellement que le constructivisme ? » dans le contexte de diverses disciplines appartenant aux lettres et sciences humaines, ainsi qu'aux sciences (naturelles et sociales). La discussion se centrera tout particulièrement sur quatre variantes du constructivisme: philosophique, cybernétique, éducatif et sociologique. Introduction It is generally acknowledged that constructivism constitutes a very important, although often contested, practical and theoretical perspective in current education research.1 A first `mild' (or ` .
    [Show full text]
  • Bridging the Gap: Toward a Realist-Constructivist Dialogue
    International Studies Review (2004) 6, 337–352 THE FORUM Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue EDITED BY PATRICK THADDEUS JACKSON School of International Service, American University Editor’s Note: J. Samuel Barkin’s International Studies Review article ‘‘Realist Con- structivism’’ (2003) makes the important point that the opposition between realist and con- structivist schools of thought in international relations (IR) may not be as clear-cut as is commonly supposed. In doing so, he focuses on how certain classical realist notions are compatible with constructivist sensibilities about the role of norms and other intersubjective factors in producing social and political outcomes. In effect, Barkin proposes a fusion of certain elements of realism and constructivism to produce a novel IR perspective. Although Barkin is not the first or only scholar to advocate a more evenhanded dialogue between realism and constructivism, his piece is one of the most comprehensive attempts to articulate points of agreement between the two approaches and to delineate the contours of a ‘‘realist- constructivist’’ research program. As such, Barkin’s piece provides an excellent opportunity for exploring and elaborating the nature of and possibilities for ‘‘realist constructivism.’’ Barkin’s emphasis on the tension between normative transformation and the limits imposed by power in the international arena is one way to initiate a dialogue between realism and constructivism. The contributors to this Forum are each trying, in their different ways, to further this dialogue and to explore the possibilities raised by dissociating constructivism from the liberal tradition. They share Barkin’s basic contention that realism and constructivism are not implacably opposed.
    [Show full text]