Abstract
AbstractIt will be argued that the dominant form of current academic science is based on ideas and concepts about science and research that date back to philosophy and sociology that was developed since the 1930s. It will be discussed how this philosophy and sociology of science has informed the ideas, myths and ideology about science held by the scientific community and still determines the popular view of science. It is even more amazing when we realize that these ideas are philosophically and sociologically untenable and since the 1970s were declared obsolete by major scholars in these same disciplines. To demonstrate this, I delve deep to discuss the distinct stages that scholars in philosophy, sociology and history of science since 1945 to 2000 have gone through to leave the analytical-positivistic philosophy behind. I will be focusing on developments of their thinking about major topics such as: how scientific knowledge is produced, the scientific method; the status of scientific knowledge and the development of our ideas about ‘truth’ and the relation of our claims to reality. It will appear that the positivistic ideas about science producing absolute truth, about ‘the unique scientific method’, its formal logical approach and its timeless foundation as a guarantee for our value-free, objective knowledge were not untenable. This is to show how thoroughly the myth has been demystified in philosophy and sociology of science. You think after these fifty pages I am kicking a dead horse? Not at all! This scientific demystification has unfortunately still not reached active scientists. In fact, the popular image of science and research is still largely based on a that Legend. This is not without consequence as will be shown in Chap. 10.1007/978-94-024-2115-6_3. These images of science have shaped and in fact distorted the organisational structures of academia and the interaction between its institutes and disciplines. It also affects the relationship of science with its stakeholders in society, its funders, the many publics private and public, and policy makers in government. In short, it determines to a large degree the growth of knowledge with major effects on society.
Reference84 articles.
1. Barker, G., & Kitcher, P. (2013). Philosophy of science: A new introduction. Oxford University Press.
2. Ben-David, J., & Sullivan, T. A. (1975). Sociology of science. Annual Review of Sociology, 1(1), 203–222. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.01.080175.001223
3. Bernstein, R. J. (1983). Beyond objectivism and relativism: Science, hermeneutics, and praxis. Basil Blackwell.
4. Bernstein, R. J. (2010). The pragmatic turn. Polity.
5. Bourdieu, P. (1975). The specificity of the scientific field and the social conditions of the progress of reason. Information (International Social Science Council), 14(6), 19–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901847501400602