The Discourse and Praxis Models in Recent Reconstructions of Scientific Knowledge Generation

Tibbetts, Paul; Johnson, Patricia Altenbernd

doi:10.1177/030631285015004007

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although he in turn had significant influence on Thomas Kuhn's thinking (cf. Kuhn 1962, Chapter X), it would be a gross misunderstanding of his work to read it as a contribution to epistemology, e.g., as a precursor of post-positivism (Tibbetts and Johnson 1985). His work is rather a contribution to clarifying the conceptual grammar of reasoning about scientific practices, in an attempt to free observers and practitioners of science of epistemological hypochondria (on that, see Laudan 1996;Hacking 1999;Zammito 2004).…”

Section: Methodological Interlude: Metallurgical Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘The Discipline of Steel’: Technical Knowledge in the Coordinative Practices of Steelmaking

Schmidt

2024

Comput Supported Coop Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is a study of the cooperative work of making steel in a contemporary steel plant. The study is, first of all, a study of the coordinative practices of a cooperative ensemble of operators controlling a time-critical transformation process, while spatially dispersed at different work stations across the plant, working under quite different and varying local constraints and requirements, with only rudimentary means of ongoing communication. Their individual and local contributions to the overall effort must be minutely synchronized to meet the strict temporal requirements of the operation as a whole. These challenges notwithstanding, the operators manage to act concertedly to produce quality steel and to do so routinely. The question is, how do they manage to do that? As the workers in the setting generally are not able to coordinate their cooperative effort discursively, it is analytically both feasible and necessary to foreground and identify the knowledge of metallurgy of steel and of the plant that enables them, as they go about their own local activities, to apprehend the problems and intentions of their colleagues as reflected in the changing state of the technical processes. The underlying thesis of the study is that in order to answer the general question of how workers engaged in cooperative work are able to heed the activities of their colleagues, and to do so routinely, we are well advised to ‘take the concept of practice seriously’.

show abstract

Section: Methodological Interlude: Metallurgical Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘The Discipline of Steel’: Technical Knowledge in the Coordinative Practices of Steelmaking

Schmidt

2024

Comput Supported Coop Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Psychologists' self-awareness, and their reconciliation of that awareness with what they have taken to be strict mandates of scientific practice, materialized in their speech as well as in their other actions. It seems an impossible task to differentiate the language of the new scientific psychology from the novel activities of building laboratories; in fact, these activities could not exist outside of discourse (for discussions of this issue see Shapin 1984aShapin , 1984bTibbetts and Johnson 1985;Woolgar 1986). Furthermore, because psychologists' new work concerned mapping the reality of human functioning and social interaction, their linguistic practices were especially important in distinguishing the reality they wanted to know from the commonly known reality of human functioning and interaction.…”

Section: The Methodological Horrors Of Methodological Horrorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-Regard and Other-Regard: Reflexive Practices in American Psychology, 1890–1940

Morawski¹

1992

Science in Context

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ArgumentPsychology has been frequently subjected to the criticism that it is an unreflexive science — that it fails to acknowledge the reflexive properties of human action which influence psychologists themselves as well as their subjects. However, even avowedly unreflexive actions may involve reflexivity, and in this paper I suggest that the practices of psychology include reflexive ones. Psychology has an established tradition of silence about the self-awareness and sell-consciousness of its actors, whether those actors are experimenters, theorists, or participants (subjects) in research, yet this silence has been established and maintained through sophisticated exercises in self-regard — through sustained reflexive work. Historical analysis reveals some of the ways in which psychologists recognized and then neglected, covered over, or denied reflexivity. Study of those instances where psychologists have engaged in self-conscious reflection or have attended to the sell-consciousness of research subjects indicates both the dangers of reflexivity to governing investigative practices and the resilience which psychology has built against reflexive work. Canonized procedures for scientific work reproduce selves of experimenters and subjects alike, selves who acknowledge only part of their reflexive engagements. Historians of psychology have a special opportunity (and obligation) to explore the reflexive dynamics of investigative practices, and, hence, to theorize aboutscientists, along with their actions and interactions, just as we theorize about science, its products, and its evolution.

show abstract

“…; and the constructivist thesis (or CT) (Latour 1980(Latour , 1983Latour and Woolgar 1979;Knorr-Cetina 1981, 1983Tibbetts and Johnson 1985).…”

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Sociology of Scientific Knowledge: The Constructivist Thesis and Relativism

Tibbetts

1986

Philosophy of the Social Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTORY REMARKSIn a recent review article, Collins (1983) distinguishes between the sociology of science and the sociology of scientific knowledge (or SSK).The former focuses on 'the elucidation of the set of normative and other institutional arrangements that enable science ... to exist and function efficiently' (p. 266). The latter, on the other hand, is concerned with 'what comes to count as scientific knowledge and how it comes so to count' (p. 267). The literature associated with the SSK ranges over a great variety of concerns, including the empirical programme of relativism (Collins ).The present paper focuses exclusively on this last issue, namely, the construction, deconstruction and reconstruction of scientific knowledge claims (SKCs) over time in the social context of scientific laboratories.In other words, the concern is with the socially contingent nature of what comes to count as a 'scientific fact'. Out of necessity the explication in Part I is confined to two significant and controversial constructivist accounts, Latour and Woolgar's Laboratory Life (1979) and Knorr-Cetina's The Manufacture of Knowledge (1981).1 Part II * Received 8.3.84 t I would like to thank my colleague, Patricia Johnson, for many hours of discussion regarding epistemological relativism. I would also like to thank the readers for their many valuable suggestions on earlier drafts of this paper. 1 The CT regarding scientific knowledge claims (or SKC s) is not, of course, exhausted by these two works. Other recent and important contributions to the CT in their own right include Brannigan

show abstract

The Discourse and Praxis Models in Recent Reconstructions of Scientific Knowledge Generation

Cited by 5 publications

References 2 publications

‘The Discipline of Steel’: Technical Knowledge in the Coordinative Practices of Steelmaking

‘The Discipline of Steel’: Technical Knowledge in the Coordinative Practices of Steelmaking

Self-Regard and Other-Regard: Reflexive Practices in American Psychology, 1890–1940

The Sociology of Scientific Knowledge: The Constructivist Thesis and Relativism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About