Interpreting life sociologically: the cases of Merton and Bourdieu

Lombardo, Carmelo; Sabetta, Lorenzo

doi:10.3280/sr2018-115003

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the author, the Mertonian idea of a scientific community would lead to the understanding that entering the field and playing its game would not have any kind of criteria regulated through the recognition of its peers. This view would lead to mask all types of scientific practices and struggles based on an opposition process between consensus and conflict (Lombardo, Sabetta 2018). The permanent struggles in the field allow it to acquire a structure to the dynamics of operation that makes the actions within it highly regulated.…”

Section: Pierre Bourdieu's Sociological Epistemologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Writing of the History of Science from the Notion of Scientific Field

Gurgel

Watanabe

2020

Transversal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does science depend on its historical context? Does understanding science as a social construction demand us to abandon rationalist perspectives of knowledge? Based on these issues, this article aims to discuss epistemological questions concerning the problem of the historicity of sciences. In first part, we analyze how different philosophical systems conceptualize this problem and point out to tensions that emerge when one tries to reconcile a rationalist with a historicist perspective of knowledge. Then, we discuss the sociological epistemology of Pierre Bourdieu arguing that the field autonomy is a key concept to understand what the author denominates the “social conditions of the progress of reason”. Finally, we present criteria to delimit the most relevant contexts in a case study on the history of science.

show abstract

Section: Pierre Bourdieu's Sociological Epistemologymentioning

confidence: 99%