Abstract
In this paper I undertake an analysis of the heritage of Kuhn and Feyerabend as compared with the main tenets of the logical positivism, and identify the components of logical positivism that directly lead to relativism. I argue that the notion of consensus creates major problems in historiography and philosophy of science, preventing a description of scientific change. I further argue that the concept of creative disagreement should be introduced into studies of science not only as a historical actuality, but also as a basic epistemological and methodological presupposition. I trace the grip of the notion of consensus in social studies of science to Durkheim’s heritage, focusing on the representatives of the Strong Program in sociology of science. I also argue that Thomas Kuhn inherited the same Durkheimian view of society through Ludwik Fleck Finally, I briefly outline a dialogical alternative to the current historiography—an alternative in which the notion of disagreement plays a fundamental epistemological role.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bakhtin, Mikhail (1984), Problems of Dostoyevsky’s Poetics. Edited and translated by Caryl Emerson. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Barnes, S. Barry (1974), T S. Kuhn and Social Science. London: Macmillan.
Barnes, S. Barry, David Bloor, and John Henry (1996), Scientific Knowledge—A Sociological Analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Beller, Mara (1997), “Criticism and Revolutions,” Science in Context, vol. 10, no.1, pp. 13–37 and vol. 10, no.6, pp. 241–255.
Bei T Fr, Mara (1999), Quantum Dialogue—The Making of a Revolution. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Beller, Mara and Arthur Fine (1994), “Bohr’s Response to EPR.” In: FAYE/FOLSE (eds.; 1994 ), pp. 1–31.
Bloor, David (1976), Knowledge and Social Imagery. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Bunge, Mario (1996), “In Praise of Intolerance to Charlatanism in Academia.” In: GROSS et. al. (eds.; 1996), pp. 96–115.
Catlin, George E. G. (1968), “Introduction to the Translation”. In: DURKHEIM 1968.
Cole, Stephen (1992), Making Science: Between Nature and Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cole, Stephen (1996), “Voodoo Sociology: Recent Developments in the Sociology of Science”. In: GROSS et. al. (eds.; 1996), pp. 274–287.
Collins, Harry M. (1992), Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Douglas, Mary (1975), Implicit Meanings: Essays in Anthropology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Durkheim, Emile (1968), The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. London: George and Unwin Ltd. [First published in 1915 ].
Earman, John (1993), “Carnap, Kuhn and the Philosophy of Scientific Methodology.” In: HORWICH (ed.; 1993 ), pp. 9–36.
Feynman, Richard P. (1998), The Meaning of It All—Thoughtsof a Citizen Scientist. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Faye, Jan and Henry J. Folse (eds.; 1994 ), Niels Bohr and Contemporary Philosophy. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Fleck, Ludwik (1979), Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press [First published in 1935 ].
Frank, Philipp (1957), Philosophy of Science. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. FRIEDMAN, MICHAEL (1987), “Carnap’s Aufbau Reconsidered,” Nous, vol. 21, pp. 521–545.
Friedman, Michael (1999), Reconsidering Logical Positivism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Galison, Peter L. and David J. Stump (eds.; 1996 ), The Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Contexts, and Power. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Ghirardi, Giancarlo, Antonio Rimini, and Tullio Weber (1986), “Unified Dynamics for Microscopic and Macroscopic Systems,” Physical Review D34, 470–491.
Gross, Paul R., Norman Levitt, and Martin W. Lewis, (eds.; 1996), The Flight from Science and Reason. New York: New York Academy of Sciences. HAACK, SUSAN (1996), “Concern for Truth: What it Means, Why it Matters.” In: GROSS et. al. (eds.; 1996 ), pp. 57–63.
Horwich, Paul (ed.; 1993 ), World Changes: Thomas Kuhn and the Nature of Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kitcher, Philip (1993), The Advancement of Science: Science without Legend, Objectivity without Illusions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Krüger, Lorenz, Gerd Gingerenzer, and Mary S. Morgan (eds.; 1987 ), The Probabilistic Revolution, vol. 1 and 2. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kuhn, Thomas S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Kuhn, Thomas S. (1987), “What Are Scientific Revolutions?” In: KRÜGER et al. (eds.; 1987 ), pp. 7–22.
Kuhn, Thomas S. (1993), “Afterwords.” In: HORWICH (ed.; 1993 ), pp. 311–341.
Kuhn, Thomas S. (2000), The Road Since Structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Latour, Bruno (1987), Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mcmullin, Ernan (1991), “Rhetoric and Theory of Choice in Science.” In: PERA/SHEA (eds.; 1991 ), pp. 55–76.
Pickering, Andrew (1984), ConstructingQuarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Pera, Marcello and William Shea (eds.; 1991 ) Persuading Science: The Art of Scientific Rhetoric. Canton, MA: Science History Publications.
Ritzer, George (1996), Classical Sociological Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill. 284 Mara Beller
Rorty, Richard (1991) Objectivity Relativism and Truth Philosophical Papers Volume I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Sampson, Edward E. (1993), Celebrating the Other, A Dialogic Account of Human Nature. Boulder: Westview Press.
Shapin, Steven (1994), A Social History of Truth. Chicago: The Chicago University Press.
Shapin, Steven (1995), “Here and Everywhere: Sociology of Scientific Knowledge,” Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 21, pp. 289–321.
Small, Henry (1974), Characteristics of Frequently Cited Papers in Chemistry. Final Report on Contract no. NSF-C795. Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information.
Sokal, Alan D. (1996), “Transgressing the Boundaries—Toward a Trans-formative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity,” Social Text, vol. 46 /47, pp. 217–252.
Russell, Bertrand (1991), History of Vestern Philosophy. London: Routledge 000000 Kegan Paul [First published in 1946 ].
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Beller, M. (2004). Neither Modernist Nor Postmodernist — A Third Way. In: Carrier, M., Roggenhofer, J., Küppers, G., Blanchard, P. (eds) Knowledge and the World: Challenges Beyond the Science Wars. The Frontiers Collection. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-08129-7_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-08129-7_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-05905-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-08129-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive