科學知識社會學

科學知識社會學（英語：sociology of scientific knowledge，縮寫為SSK）研究作為社會活動的科學，特別是處理「科學的社會條件和影響，以及科學活動的社會結構和過程。」^[1]科學無知的社會學（英語：sociology of scientific ignorance，縮寫為SSI）是對科學知識社會學的補充。^[2]^[3]為了進行比較，知識社會學研究人類知識和流行觀念對社會的影響以及知識與其產生的社會背景之間的關係。

科學知識社會學家研究科學領域的發展，並試圖確認在存在歧義之處的詮釋彈性與偶發事件的瞬間。^[4]

這種變化可能與各種政治、歷史、文化或經濟因素有關。至關重要的是，該領域並不打算提倡相對主義或攻擊科學項目；研究人員的目標是解釋為什麼由於外部社會和歷史環境，一種解釋而不是另一種解釋成功。

該領域出現於 1960 年代末和 1970 年代初，起初幾乎完全出現於英國。該領域的其他早期發展中心位於法國、德國和美國（特別是在康奈爾大學）。^[5]主要理論家包括 Barry Barnes、大衛·布魯爾（David Bloor）、Sal Restivo、Randall Collins、加斯東·巴舍拉（Gaston Bachelard）、Harry Collins、Karin Knorr Cetina、保羅·費耶阿本德（Paul Feyerabend）、Steve Fuller、Martin Kusch、布魯諾·拉圖爾（Bruno Latour）、Mike Mulkay、德瑞克·約翰·德索拉·普萊斯（Derek J. de Solla Price）、Lucy Suchman 和安塞姆·施特勞斯（Anselm Strauss）。

綱領及學派

20世紀70年代，英語版本的科學知識社會學出現在自覺反對與美國人羅伯特·金·莫頓（一般被認為是科學社會學的開創性作者之一）有關的科學社會學。默頓是一種「科學家社會學」，將科學的認知內容排除在社會學的考慮之外；相比之下，SSK的目的是為科學思想本身提供社會學解釋，從托馬斯·S·庫恩的作品的各個方面，特別是文化人類學（Durkheim，Mauss）以及晚年維特根斯坦。SSK早期的擁護者之一大衛·布魯爾將所謂「弱綱領」（或「綱領」）和他所謂「強綱領」進行了對比，前者只是對錯誤信念提供了社會解釋，而後者認為社會因素影響着所有的信仰。

弱綱領更多的是對一種方法的描述，而不是一個有組織的運動。這個術語適用於歷史學家、社會學家和科學哲學家，他們僅僅引用社會學因素來對那些出錯的信念負責。拉卡托斯和（在某種氣氛下）托馬斯•庫恩也可以說他堅持這樣做。強綱領與兩個團體的工作特別相關：1970年代和80年代，愛丁堡學派(David Bloor Barry Barnes 和他們在愛丁堡大學科學研究中心的同事) ，另一個團體是巴斯大學的巴斯學派（巴斯大學的Harry Collins和其他人）。「愛丁堡社會學家」和「巴斯社會學家」分別推動了強有力的相對主義方案和經驗方案。上世紀80年代，SSK也與科學相關(與約克大學的米高·馬爾凱聯繫在一起)，以及對SSK對科學的相對主義立場和自身知識主張狀況相關的悖論引起的反身性問題的關注（Steve Woolgar，Malcolm Ashmore）。

科學知識社會學通過其主要協會4S和EASST擁有重要的國際網絡，最近在日本、韓國、中國台灣和拉丁美洲建立了團體。近年來，它對生物科學和信息學的批判性分析作出了重大貢獻。

批評

國家科學技術學院受到了行動者網絡理論學派的批評。這些理論家批評SSK的社會學還原論和人類中心主義宇宙。他們說，SSK過於依賴人類行為者以及社會規則和公約來解決科學爭議。這場辯論在一篇《認識論的雞》（Epistemological Chicken）的文章中被討論。^[6]

參看

爭議：

參考文獻

↑ 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 , 編. 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].

延伸閱讀

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.

其他相關材料

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

外部連結

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 , 編. 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]