科学知识社会学

科学知识社会学（英语：sociology of scientific knowledge，缩写为SSK）研究作为社会活动的科学，特别是处理“科学的社会条件和影响，以及科学活动的社会结构和过程。”^[1]科学无知的社会学（英语：sociology of scientific ignorance，缩写为SSI）是对科学知识社会学的补充。^[2]^[3]为了进行比较，知识社会学研究人类知识和流行观念对社会的影响以及知识与其产生的社会背景之间的关系。

科学知识社会学家研究科学领域的发展，并试图确认在存在歧义之处的诠释弹性与偶发事件的瞬间。^[4]

这种变化可能与各种政治、历史、文化或经济因素有关。至关重要的是，该领域并不打算提倡相对主义或攻击科学项目；研究人员的目标是解释为什么由于外部社会和历史环境，一种解释而不是另一种解释成功。

该领域出现于 1960 年代末和 1970 年代初，起初几乎完全出现于英国。该领域的其他早期发展中心位于法国、德国和美国（特别是在康奈尔大学）。^[5]主要理论家包括 Barry Barnes、大卫·布鲁尔（David Bloor）、Sal Restivo、Randall Collins、加斯东·巴舍拉（Gaston Bachelard）、Harry Collins、Karin Knorr Cetina、保罗·费耶阿本德（Paul Feyerabend）、Steve Fuller、Martin Kusch、布鲁诺·拉图尔（Bruno Latour）、Mike Mulkay、德瑞克·约翰·德索拉·普莱斯（Derek J. de Solla Price）、Lucy Suchman 和安塞姆·施特劳斯（Anselm Strauss）。

纲领及学派

20世纪70年代，英语版本的科学知识社会学出现在自觉反对与美国人罗伯特·金·莫顿（一般被认为是科学社会学的开创性作者之一）有关的科学社会学。默顿是一种“科学家社会学”，将科学的认知内容排除在社会学的考虑之外；相比之下，SSK的目的是为科学思想本身提供社会学解释，从托马斯·S·库恩的作品的各个方面，特别是文化人类学（Durkheim，Mauss）以及晚年维特根斯坦。SSK早期的拥护者之一大卫·布鲁尔将所谓“弱纲领”（或“纲领”）和他所谓“强纲领”进行了对比，前者只是对错误信念提供了社会解释，而后者认为社会因素影响着所有的信仰。

弱纲领更多的是对一种方法的描述，而不是一个有组织的运动。这个术语适用于历史学家、社会学家和科学哲学家，他们仅仅引用社会学因素来对那些出错的信念负责。拉卡托斯和（在某种气氛下）托马斯•库恩也可以说他坚持这样做。强纲领与两个团体的工作特别相关：1970年代和80年代，爱丁堡学派(David Bloor Barry Barnes 和他们在爱丁堡大学科学研究中心的同事) ，另一个团体是巴斯大学的巴斯学派（巴斯大学的Harry Collins和其他人）。 “爱丁堡社会学家”和“巴斯社会学家”分别推动了强有力的相对主义方案和经验方案。上世纪80年代，SSK也与科学相关(与约克大学的迈克尔·马尔凯联系在一起)，以及对SSK对科学的相对主义立场和自身知识主张状况相关的悖论引起的反身性问题的关注（Steve Woolgar，Malcolm Ashmore）。

科学知识社会学通过其主要协会4S和EASST拥有重要的国际网络，最近在日本、韩国、中国台湾和拉丁美洲建立了团体。近年来，它对生物科学和信息学的批判性分析作出了重大贡献。

批评

国家科学技术学院受到了行动者网络理论学派的批评。这些理论家批评SSK的社会学还原论和人类中心主义宇宙。他们说，SSK过于依赖人类行为者以及社会规则和公约来解决科学争议。这场辩论在一篇《认识论的鸡》（Epistemological Chicken）的文章中被讨论。^[6]

参看

争议：

参考文献

↑ Ben-David, Joseph; Teresa A. Sullivan. Sociology of Science. Annual Review of Sociology. 1975, 1 (1): 203–222 [2006-11-29]. doi:10.1146/annurev.so.01.080175.001223.
↑ Stocking, Holly. On Drawing Attention to Ignorance. Science Communication. 1998, 20 (1): 165–178. S2CID 145791904. doi:10.1177/1075547098020001019.
↑ Wehling, Peter. Beyond knowledge? Scientific ignorance from a sociological point of view. {{subst:ill|Zeitschrift für Soziologie|de}}. 2001, 30 (6): 465–484 [2013-01-19].
↑ Baber, Zaheer. Ashmore, Malcolm; Bhaskar, Roy; Mukerji, Chandra; Woolgar, Steve; Yearley, Steven , 编. Sociology of Scientific Knowledge: Lost in the Reflexive Funhouse?. Theory and Society. 1992, 21 (1): 105–119. ISSN 0304-2421.
↑ Department of Sociology | Department of Sociology Cornell Arts & Sciences. sociology.cornell.edu. [2021-09-05].
↑ Collins, H. M. and S. Yearley (1992). "Epistemological Chicken". In A. Pickering (Ed.) Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago, Chicago University Press: 301-326. Referenced at ANT resource list University of Lancaster, with the summary "Argues against the generalised symmetry of actor-network, preferring in the interpretive sociology tradition to treat humans as ontologically distinct language carriers". Website accessed 8 February 2011.

Kusch, Martin. Sociology of scientific knowledge – research guide. 1998 [2012-02-23].

延伸阅读

Baez, John. The Bogdanoff Affair. 2010.
Bloor, David (1976) Knowledge and social imagery. London: Routledge.
Bloor, David (1999) "Anti-Latour". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A Volume 30, Issue 1, March 1999, Pages 81–112.
Chu, Dominique (2013), The Science Myth---God, society, the self and what we will never know, ISBN 1782790470
Collins, H.M. (1975) The seven sexes: A study in the sociology of a phenomenon, or the replication of experiments in physics, Sociology, 9, 205-24.
Collins, H.M. (1985). Changing order: Replication and induction in scientific practice. London: Sage.
Collins, Harry and Steven Yearley. (1992). "Epistemological Chicken" in Science as Practice and Culture, A. Pickering (ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 301-326.
Edwards, D., Ashmore, M. & Potter, J. (1995). Death and furniture: The rhetoric, politics, and theology of bottom line arguments against relativism. History of the Human Sciences, 8, 25-49.
Gilbert, G. N. & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora's box: A sociological analysis of scientists' discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. 2nd Edition. Princeton: Princeton University Press. (not an SSK-book, but has a similar approach to science studies)
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action : how to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (not an SSK-book, but has a similar approach to science studies)
Pickering, A. (1984). Constructing Quarks: A sociological history of particle physics. Chicago; University of Chicago Press.
Schantz, Richard and Markus Seidel (2011). The Problem of Relativism in the Sociology of (Scientific) Knowledge. Frankfurt: ontos.
Shapin, S. & Schaffer, S. (1985). Leviathan and the Air-Pump. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Williams, R. & Edge, D. (1996). The Social Shaping of Technology. Research Policy, vol. 25, pp. 856–899 [1]
Willard, Charles Arthur. (1996). Liberalism and the Problem of Knowledge: A New Rhetoric for Modern Democracy, University of Chicago Press.
Jasanoff, S. Markle, G. Pinch T. & Petersen, J. (Eds)(2002), Handbook of science, technology and society, Rev Ed.. London: Sage.

其他相关材料

Becker, Ernest. The structure of evil; an essay on the unification of the science of man. New York: G. Braziller. 1968.
Shapin, Steven. Here and Everywhere: Sociology of Scientific Knowledge. Annual Review of Sociology (Annual Reviews). 1995, 21: 289–321. doi:10.1146/annurev.so.21.080195.001445.
Historical sociologist Simon Schaffer and Steven Shapin are interviewed on SSK
The Sociology of Ignorance website featuring the sociology of scientific ignorance

外部链接

PhilPapers上的Sociology of Science

[socofsci-bendavid2-1] Ben-David, Joseph; Teresa A. Sullivan. Sociology of Science. Annual Review of Sociology. 1975, 1 (1): 203–222 [2006-11-29]. doi:10.1146/annurev.so.01.080175.001223.

[socofig-stocking2-2] Stocking, Holly. On Drawing Attention to Ignorance. Science Communication. 1998, 20 (1): 165–178. S2CID 145791904. doi:10.1177/1075547098020001019.

[socofig-wehling2-3] Wehling, Peter. Beyond knowledge? Scientific ignorance from a sociological point of view. {{subst:ill|Zeitschrift für Soziologie|de}}. 2001, 30 (6): 465–484 [2013-01-19].

[4] Baber, Zaheer. Ashmore, Malcolm; Bhaskar, Roy; Mukerji, Chandra; Woolgar, Steve; Yearley, Steven , 编. Sociology of Scientific Knowledge: Lost in the Reflexive Funhouse?. Theory and Society. 1992, 21 (1): 105–119. ISSN 0304-2421.

[5] Department of Sociology | Department of Sociology Cornell Arts & Sciences. sociology.cornell.edu. [2021-09-05].

[6] Collins, H. M. and S. Yearley (1992). "Epistemological Chicken". In A. Pickering (Ed.) Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago, Chicago University Press: 301-326. Referenced at ANT resource list University of Lancaster, with the summary "Argues against the generalised symmetry of actor-network, preferring in the interpretive sociology tradition to treat humans as ontologically distinct language carriers". Website accessed 8 February 2011.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]