sociology of science


Also found in: Wikipedia.

sociology of science

the branch of sociology concerned with study of the social processes involved in the production of scientific knowledge as well as the social implications of this knowledge, including TECHNOLOGY (see also SOCIOLOGY OF KNOWLEDGE, SCIENCE, SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE).

The pioneering work on the sociology of science was by Robert MERTON (1938) whose determinedly sociological work on 17th-century British science (especially the Royal Society) emphasized the mix of economic and military concerns, interests and religious beliefs (notably Protestantism) in the motives of early scientists. In his later work Merton also identified central social characteristics of science (e.g. the ‘norm of universality’, i.e. that, at least in principle, anyone ought to be able to check for themselves the validity of any scientific ‘finding’).

If Merton's later work identified ‘ideal types’ of scientific activity, subsequent work in the sociology of science has tended to break down any sharp distinction between science and other forms of knowledge. In recent years, sociologists have distinguished 'strong’ and ‘weak’ versions of the sociology of science. If earlier ‘weak approaches were based largely on the need to explain the social basis of ‘false’claims to knowledge (scientific errors, ‘parasciences’ such as astrology, etc.), leaving the basis of’true’ knowledge a matter for the PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, the more recent 'strong’ approach has seen as its role the study and explanation of all forms of scientific knowledge (see also EPISTEMOLOGY).

One thing to emerge from this more even-handed treatment of’true’ and false’ knowledge is that both of these forms share a common basis in everyday constructions of social reality, and problems in escaping INDEXICALITY and in establishing warrantabilty Understanding of both kinds of knowledge is held to benefit from the study of the social impetus to new scientific ideas provided by economic and social interests, including the disciplinary and personal interests of the scientists.

Examples of recent detailed study in this expanded vein are:

  1. studies of the role of interests, fashions, etc. in particular disciplines or movements in science, e.g. the rise and fall of EUGENICS (Harwood, 1977), studies of IQ testing and even the history of mathematics;
  2. studies of the DIFFUSION of scientific ideas;
  3. studies of major 'scientific revolutions’ (e.g. KUHN, 1962);
  4. ethnographic and related forms of close-up empirical analysis of the everyday social construction of scientific knowledge, e.g. in laboratories, the presentational arguments and graphic representations, etc. used by science, e.g. B. Latour and S. Woolgar, Laboratory Life (1979).
References in periodicals archive ?
9%) are related to the book The sociology of science by Merton with the following bibliographic specifications:
Charum worked from Latour's and Callon's sociology of science, whereas Garfield's work stemmed from a more traditional sociology of science proposed by Merton and Pierce.
Adam Mohr is a senior lecturer in the Critical Writing Program and the History and Sociology of Science Department at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
He was Ludwig Fleck, an immunologist and one of the founders of the sociology of science, forced to make an awful choice between knowledge and conscience.
Likewise, teaching about the history and sociology of science is unusual.
Since the late 1990s the work has focused more on the sociology of science and science policy issues and, more recently, also on knowledge production in higher education.
The first part of the book explores the philosophical context of natural law and the study of it, as well as the major results of Western physics, briefly criticizing the so-called "strong program" of sociology of science.
With the publication in 2012 of the fiftieth anniversary of Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) (SSR), one of the most cited books of all time, Wray's Kuhn's Evolutionary Social Epistemology (KESE) aims to defend Kuhn's later views on the epistemology of science and to clarify Kuhn's relationship with the sociology of science and science studies.
He also gives an overview of modern analysis in sociology of science, critical linguistics, cultural studies and feminist critique of knowledge, stating that despite variations, all have dealt with an empirical object that has taken form as discourse.
I'm also pleased to see the sociology of science recognised in this way.
Erdos graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a degree in the history and sociology of science.
However, I searched in vain for even one story about feminist science, either about the scientists themselves, women such as Ruth Bleier, Ruth Hubbard, Evelyn Fox Keller, Donna Haraway, Lynda Birke, Evelynn Hammonds or myself, or about those in related fields such as the philosophy history, or sociology of science, including Sandra Harding, Helen Longino, Elizabeth Potter, Margaret Rossiter, Hilary Rose, Adele Clarke, Alison Wylie, (who have I left out?