Full Text
Scientific Norms/Counternorms
Stephen Turner
Subject
Life and Physical Sciences
Sociology
»
Science and Technology
DOI: 10.1111/b.9781405124331.2007.x
Extract
The classic sociological formulation of the “norms of science” was given by Robert K. Merton, in an article originally published as “A Note on Science and Democracy” (1942) and reprinted as “Science and Democratic Social Structure” in his Social Theory and Social Structure (1968 [1949, 1957]) and as “The Normative Structure of Science” in The Sociology of Science (1973). The formulation is sometimes known by its initials, CUDOS, which stands for the four norms: communism, universalism, disinterestedness, and organized skepticism. Merton's representation of the normative character of science has proved to be one of the most enduring of all sociological analyses. It has been discussed at length by both critics, who proposed the concept of counternorms, and sympathizers, and in the late 1960s and early 1970s became emblematic of the “Mertonian” approach to the social study of science. Nor has it remained static. “Replication” is sometimes called the fifth norm. John Ziman suggested that “originality” be added as a norm, and in many recent explanations of the acronym CUDOS the O is used for originality. Merton wrote two papers on the norms of science, both concerned with a political problem: the autonomy of science. The first was “Science and the Social Order” (1938, in Merton 1973 ). This paper was presented during a period of intense political activity, a response to the political ... log in or subscribe to read full text
Log In
You are not currently logged-in to Blackwell Reference Online
If your institution has a subscription, you can log in here: