Blackwell Reference Online

Extract

Sociological frameworks used in the study of science move between two epistemological extremes. First, it is held that nature is recorded by science provided that the latter is in a fit state as a social institution to do so. Second, it is held that science is a social construction and in this sense in principle no different than any other part of culture. If one is convinced of the first proposition, one's interest will be directed towards the “goal” of science; the institutional norms that regulate the activity of the community of scientists; competition; the reward structure of science operating through “recognition” (citation practices, Nobel prizes, peer review); and similar topics. If one is convinced of the second proposition, one will be interested not so much in the institution and community of science, but rather in scientific knowledge and the question of how scientists reach a point where it can be said to have been “made.” One will be interested in the “negotiation” through which a stable order of scientific objects is arrived at. In this “negotiation” there is included writing practices and the empirical study of “talk” (or discourse). The great American sociologist Robert K. Merton was certain that science had social underpinnings. It was not the product of timeless individual curiosity. In its modern form – as understood by historians of science – it had its roots ... log in or subscribe to read full text