Naming without necessity

Gingras, Yves

doi:10.1007/s11873-010-0124-1

Cited by 33 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, we understand epistemology not as the analysis aiming at clarifying what constitutes knowledge, but as ‘the conditions under which and the means with which things are made into objects of knowledge’ (Meloni 2016 : 224; Rheinberger 2010 ). This definition of epistemology as historical and political process goes not without reminding of Marx’s historical materialism (Gingras 2010 ). It also directly echoes Bourdieu’s research program that identifies epistemological conflicts as always, inseparably, political conflicts (Bourdieu 1976 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural Power and Epistemologies in the Scientific Field: Why a Rapid Reconciliation Between Functional and Evolutionary Biology is Unlikely

Benz,

Bühlmann

2024

Minerva

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The past decade has been marked by a series of global crises, presenting an opportunity to reevaluate the relationship between science and politics. The biological sciences are instrumental in understanding natural phenomena and informing policy decisions. However, scholars argue that current scientific expertise often fails to account for entire populations and long-term impacts, hindering efforts to address issues such as biodiversity loss, global warming, and pandemics. This article explores the structural challenges of integrating an evolutionary perspective, historically opposed to functional determinants of health and disease, into current biological science practices. Using data on Swiss biology professors from 1957, 1980, and 2000, we examine the structural power dynamics that have led to the division between these competing epistemologies, and how this division has influenced resource allocation and career trajectories. Our analysis suggests that this cleavage presents a significant obstacle to achieving fruitful reconciliations, and that increased academicization and internationalization may benefit functional biologists at the expense of evolutionary biologists. While evolutionary biologists have gained symbolic recognition in recent years, this has not translated into valuable expertise in the political domain.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural Power and Epistemologies in the Scientific Field: Why a Rapid Reconciliation Between Functional and Evolutionary Biology is Unlikely

Benz,

Bühlmann

2024

Minerva

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sometimes, the adoption of a new analytic term, e.g., "exploratory experimentation," is felicitous in this regard. Yet it is not always the case that the process of giving a new name to a practice generates novel analytical insights or explanations (Gingras 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mess in Science and Wicked Problems

Schickore

2020

Perspectives on Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the claim that science is “messy.” Part I argues first, that a good portion of today’s discussions about messy science is just a portrayal of familiar features of science in new terms. In the paper, I refer to this as “messy science talk.” Second, Part I draws out rhetorical functions of messy science talk, namely the denigration of science in the popular media and the celebration of the maverick. Part II identifies one way in which it is enlightening to think about mess in current science, namely in reference to the problems that scientists need to address. It also shows that we do not need an entirely new conceptual inventory to analyze these problems. “Mess” and “wicked problems” were a theme in operations research and theories of social planning in the 1970s. These older analyses can illuminate important characteristics of today’s scientific problems. Wicked problems cut across different disciplines, engage different stakeholders (including non-scientists), are fluid, and cannot even be clearly formulated. They are urgent and need to be addressed before sufficient evidence is in.

show abstract

Geschichte ohne Kausalität. Abgrenzungsstrategien gegen die Wissenschaftssoziologie in zeitgenössischen Ansätzen historischer Epistemologie

Kinzel

2012

Ber Wissenschaftsgesch

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

History Without Causality. How Contemporary Historical Epistemology Demarcates Itself From the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge. Contemporary proponents of historical epistemology often try to delimit their enterprise by demarcating it from the sociology of scientific knowledge and other sociologically oriented approaches in the history of science. Their criticism is directed against the use of causal explanations which are deemed to invite reductionism and lead to a totalizing perspective on science. In the present article I want to analyse this line of criticism in what I consider are two paradigmatic works of contemporary historical epistemology: Lorraine Daston's und Peter Galison's Objectivity and Hans‐Jörg Rheinberger's Toward a History of Epistemic Things. I first present their arguments against the sociological and causal analysis of scientific knowledge and practice and then try to defend sociological work in the history of science against their charges. I will, however, not do so by defending causal explanations directly. Rather, I will show that the arguments against sociological analysis put forward in contemporary historical epistemology, as well as historical epistemology's own models of historical explanation and narration, bear problematic consequences. I argue that Daston, Galison and Rheinberger fail to create productive resonances between macro‐ and microhistorical perspectives, that they reproduce an internalist picture of scientific knowledge, and finally that Rheinberger's attempt to deconstruct the dichotomy between subject and object leads him to neglect questions about the political dimension of scientific research.

show abstract

Naming without necessity

Cited by 33 publications

References 24 publications

Structural Power and Epistemologies in the Scientific Field: Why a Rapid Reconciliation Between Functional and Evolutionary Biology is Unlikely

Structural Power and Epistemologies in the Scientific Field: Why a Rapid Reconciliation Between Functional and Evolutionary Biology is Unlikely

Mess in Science and Wicked Problems

Geschichte ohne Kausalität. Abgrenzungsstrategien gegen die Wissenschaftssoziologie in zeitgenössischen Ansätzen historischer Epistemologie

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About