Information from the Slides
Lecture 8 – Chapter 8
Trivial observation: Science is practiced in a social context and governed by social norms.
Scientists are:
- employed by some institution
- often working in a team
- have to apply to funding bodies for grants
- have to publish their results in journals edited by other scientists, etc.
The relation between science and society raises several questions (and traditional answers):
- Are the sciences neutral with respect to the values that characterize the context in which they are
practiced? Scientific knowledge is objective, value-free, and context-independent.
- Does the social context in which scientific research is carried out affect the outcomes of research?
How? The social context in which an investigation is carried out does not affect its outcomes (data,
models, theories, …)
- Does the knowledge we gain in a scientific investigation reflect the particular social values or the social
background of those involved in the investigation? Scientific knowledge is about facts in the world; the
social context in which these facts are discovered and justified has no bearing on knowledge of these
facts.
“The rise of science and its success results from social forces (e.g., rewards, recognition, …). But there is
no connection between the content of scientific knowledge and the social context in which it has been
produced.” - Robert K. Merton (1910- 2003), founding father of modern sociology of science
“The history of science is always richer than its rational reconstruction. But rational reconstruction or
internal history is primary, external history is only secondary, since the most important problems of
external history are defined by internal history.” – Imre Lakatos
The main points of constructivism are to raise consciousness and to be critical of the status quo.
Constructivists aim to raise consciousness about X by showing that: X need not have existed, or need
not be as it is now. X is not determined by the nature of things. X is not inevitable.
The truth or falsehood of (at least some) scientific claims does not depend on their relation to the
world but on the attitudes scientists take towards them.
Social constructivists believe that it is the social factors surrounding scientific practice that determine
which beliefs are held to be true or false. They would emphasise that:
- Beliefs that anorexia involves a fear of gaining weight show up only in some societies in certain places
at some times.
- The truth of these beliefs depend on social factors.
Constructivists about X believe that: (i) X need not have existed. Very often they go further and claim
that: (ii) X is bad as it is. (iii) We would be better off if X were eliminated, or radically transformed.
Three issues constructivism raises:
(a) In what sense are scientific facts constructed?
- ‘Construction’ has to be understood literally.
- ‘Construction’ has to be understood in terms of scientific knowledge.
, (b) Is there any distinctive method for justifying scientific beliefs?
Some constructivists–in particular the Edinburgh School–do not distinguish between methods
for explaining how scientific beliefs arise in the scientific community (or the wider public) and
methods for explaining how they are justified.
No distinctive method of justification for scientific beliefs. (There simply is no difference
between an explanation of how beliefs arise and their justification)
(c) Does constructivism involve some form of relativism?
Someone who holds that X is not simply true, but only true for someone and from a certain point of
view, holds a relativist view. Relativists deny that there is a unique set of true justified beliefs that
people ought to adopt regardless of context. Different sets of beliefs can be equally true or justified
if their assessment is sensitive to facts about the person or the group holding the beliefs and their
standpoint.
Some relativisms:
• Subjectivism: Scientific knowledge is relative to individual scientists and their individual tastes and
fancies.
• ‘Micro-sociological’ view: Scientific knowledge is determined by social arrangements of the community
of scientists.
• ‘Macro-sociological’ view: Scientific knowledge is determined by the wider political and social contexts
in which a scientific community operates.
- Read the slides for the case of mental illness
Lecture 9 – Chapter 9
How could we explain the imbalance of the number of female students enrolling at universities and the
number of females pursuing a career in research?
No single explanation, but several factors:
- Stereotypes encountered by girls in science.
-Family-caring responsibilities.
- Bias women may face when choosing a career.
NOTE Bias and stereotyping need not be explicit or consciously endorsed. > Try to take the implicit-
association test (IAT)
The ‘man of reason’ and mother nature. Metaphors
Science = male • Nature = female
Scientific method = Forceful investigation & manipulation of the “secrets of mother nature.”
What do current numbers about women in science suggest?
Possible answer:
- Science is a force in the maintenance of the status quo.
- Scientific institutions reinforce forms of exclusion and coercion, even in apparently “free and
democratic” societies.
What is feminism?
A collection of movements and ideologies.
Lecture 8 – Chapter 8
Trivial observation: Science is practiced in a social context and governed by social norms.
Scientists are:
- employed by some institution
- often working in a team
- have to apply to funding bodies for grants
- have to publish their results in journals edited by other scientists, etc.
The relation between science and society raises several questions (and traditional answers):
- Are the sciences neutral with respect to the values that characterize the context in which they are
practiced? Scientific knowledge is objective, value-free, and context-independent.
- Does the social context in which scientific research is carried out affect the outcomes of research?
How? The social context in which an investigation is carried out does not affect its outcomes (data,
models, theories, …)
- Does the knowledge we gain in a scientific investigation reflect the particular social values or the social
background of those involved in the investigation? Scientific knowledge is about facts in the world; the
social context in which these facts are discovered and justified has no bearing on knowledge of these
facts.
“The rise of science and its success results from social forces (e.g., rewards, recognition, …). But there is
no connection between the content of scientific knowledge and the social context in which it has been
produced.” - Robert K. Merton (1910- 2003), founding father of modern sociology of science
“The history of science is always richer than its rational reconstruction. But rational reconstruction or
internal history is primary, external history is only secondary, since the most important problems of
external history are defined by internal history.” – Imre Lakatos
The main points of constructivism are to raise consciousness and to be critical of the status quo.
Constructivists aim to raise consciousness about X by showing that: X need not have existed, or need
not be as it is now. X is not determined by the nature of things. X is not inevitable.
The truth or falsehood of (at least some) scientific claims does not depend on their relation to the
world but on the attitudes scientists take towards them.
Social constructivists believe that it is the social factors surrounding scientific practice that determine
which beliefs are held to be true or false. They would emphasise that:
- Beliefs that anorexia involves a fear of gaining weight show up only in some societies in certain places
at some times.
- The truth of these beliefs depend on social factors.
Constructivists about X believe that: (i) X need not have existed. Very often they go further and claim
that: (ii) X is bad as it is. (iii) We would be better off if X were eliminated, or radically transformed.
Three issues constructivism raises:
(a) In what sense are scientific facts constructed?
- ‘Construction’ has to be understood literally.
- ‘Construction’ has to be understood in terms of scientific knowledge.
, (b) Is there any distinctive method for justifying scientific beliefs?
Some constructivists–in particular the Edinburgh School–do not distinguish between methods
for explaining how scientific beliefs arise in the scientific community (or the wider public) and
methods for explaining how they are justified.
No distinctive method of justification for scientific beliefs. (There simply is no difference
between an explanation of how beliefs arise and their justification)
(c) Does constructivism involve some form of relativism?
Someone who holds that X is not simply true, but only true for someone and from a certain point of
view, holds a relativist view. Relativists deny that there is a unique set of true justified beliefs that
people ought to adopt regardless of context. Different sets of beliefs can be equally true or justified
if their assessment is sensitive to facts about the person or the group holding the beliefs and their
standpoint.
Some relativisms:
• Subjectivism: Scientific knowledge is relative to individual scientists and their individual tastes and
fancies.
• ‘Micro-sociological’ view: Scientific knowledge is determined by social arrangements of the community
of scientists.
• ‘Macro-sociological’ view: Scientific knowledge is determined by the wider political and social contexts
in which a scientific community operates.
- Read the slides for the case of mental illness
Lecture 9 – Chapter 9
How could we explain the imbalance of the number of female students enrolling at universities and the
number of females pursuing a career in research?
No single explanation, but several factors:
- Stereotypes encountered by girls in science.
-Family-caring responsibilities.
- Bias women may face when choosing a career.
NOTE Bias and stereotyping need not be explicit or consciously endorsed. > Try to take the implicit-
association test (IAT)
The ‘man of reason’ and mother nature. Metaphors
Science = male • Nature = female
Scientific method = Forceful investigation & manipulation of the “secrets of mother nature.”
What do current numbers about women in science suggest?
Possible answer:
- Science is a force in the maintenance of the status quo.
- Scientific institutions reinforce forms of exclusion and coercion, even in apparently “free and
democratic” societies.
What is feminism?
A collection of movements and ideologies.
