Abstract
This article examines the recent political-cumepistemological criticism of reductionism in fields such as sociobiology, behavioral ecology, behavioral genetics, and IQ research. It identifies and challenges some unexamined assumptions underlying current “anti-reductionist” reasoning, especially the belief that there are inherent links between political motivations and scientific convictions, between “bad” science and undesirable political consequences, and between methodological and ontological reductionism. The author analyzes the conflict in scientific world views between anti-reductionist “weeders” and reductionist “planters.” Paradoxically, in their criticism of research strategies routinely used by alleged reductionists, anti-reductionists often sound like arch-reductionists themselves. The author argues that the various linked beliefs in anti-reductionist reasoning should be uncoupled, not only for intellectual, but also for political reasons.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Public Administration,Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Sociology and Political Science
Reference106 articles.
1. Précis ofVaulting Ambition: Sociobiology and the Quest for Human Nature
2. Dialogue. The Critique: Sociobiology: Another Biological Determinism
3. Lewontin R.C. (1975b). Transcript of “NOVA” program, WGBH Boston, #211. Transmission by PBS, Feb. 2.
4. Luria S.E. (1974). “What Can Biologists Solve?” The New York Review of Books (February 7):22–28.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献