Idealization in Science: A Methodological Reflection

  • Christopher Peet
Chapter

Summary

Drawing from the example of Sigmund Koch’s work, this paper examines the notion of scientific objectivity. Understanding “scientific objectivity” as a particular ideal which orients the production of scientific knowledge, I propose that scientific practitioners perform an idealization of their subject matter. This idealization is tacitly embedded within what Koch calls the “analytical pattern” of science. I speculate on the history of this embedding, sketching a route for the development of the notion of “scientific objectivity” from “pre-objective” phenomenal experience to the elaborated skillful activity of the scientific investigator. In the context of this skillful activity, idealization guides the making explicit of the tacitly experienced subject matter. It acts as a guide in the embodying of a set of values which the scientist upholds.

Keywords

Scientific Objectivity Creative Work Phenomenal Experience Scientific Practitioner Scientific Investigator 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cassirer, E. (1953). Philosophy of symbolic forms. Vols. 1–3. Translated by R. Mannheim. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Danziger, K. (1990). Constructing the subject: Historical origins of psychological research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Feyerabend, P. (1976). Against method. New York: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  4. Gergen, K. (1994). Realities and relationships: Soundings in social construction. Cambridge London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Harding, S. (1986). The science question in feminism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Horkheimer, M., Adorno, T. (1972). Dialectic of enlightenment. Translated by J. Cumming. New York: Seabury.Google Scholar
  7. Koch, S. (Ed.). (1959a). Psychology: A study of a science. Study I: Conceptual and Systematic. Vols. 1–3. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  8. Koch, S. (19596). Epilogue. In S. Koch (Ed.), (1959a), pp. 729–788.Google Scholar
  9. Koch, S. (Ed.). (1962). Psychology: A study of a science. Study II: Empirical substructure and relations with other sciences. Vol. 4. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  10. Koch, S. (Ed.). (1963). Psychology: A study of a science. Study III: Empirical substructure and relations with other sciences. Vols. 5–6. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  11. Koch, S. (1965). The allures of meaning in modern psychology. In R. Farson (Ed.), Science and human affairs (pp. 55–82 ). Palo Alto, CA: Science Behavior Books.Google Scholar
  12. Koch, S. (1976). Language communities, search cells, and the psychological studies. In W. J. Arnold (Ed.). Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1975. Vol. 23: 447–559. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
  13. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. Translated by C. Smith. London: Routledge Kegan Paul. (Originally published in 1945.)Google Scholar
  14. Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  15. Shotter, J. (1993). Conversational realities. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self The making of the modern identity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher Peet
    • 1
  1. 1.University of AlbertaCanada

Personalised recommendations