Abstract
The study of science is still in its early stages, that is to say, without a paradigm. It is a field rich in hypotheses but poor in effective results. Philosophy of science often enough lacks empirical backing, and many case studies in the history of science are not compatible with the philosophy of science. In fact, when we ourselves have tried to check our theoretical approach against insights from the history and sociology of science, we found that, in switching to and fro between theory and empirical data, we tended to lose track of one or the other of these aspects. Moreover, there is an additional danger: as the field of critical science studies becomes professionalized, as it inevitably will, it may become depoliticized.
The radicals were wrong; but they are beginning to look less stupidly wrongthan they did once.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography
Albert, H.: 1976, ‘Die Idee der Wahrheit and der Primat der Politik. Über die Konse- quenzen der deutschen Ideologie für die Entwicklung der Wissenschaft’, in Hübner, K. et al. (eds.): 1976, Die politische Herausforderung der Wissenschaft, Hoffmann and Campe, Hamburg, pp. 149–158.
Andersson, G.: 1976, ‘Freiheit oder Finalisierung der Wissenschaft?’, in Hubner, K. et al. (eds.): 1976, Die politische Herausforderung der Wissenschaft, pp. 66–76.
Böhme, G., van den Daele, W., and Krohn, W.: 1973, ‘Die Finalisierung der Wissenschaft’, Zeitschrift fur Soziologie 2, 128–144.
Böhme, G., van den Daele, W., and Krohn, W.: 1976, ‘Finalization in science’, Social Science Information 15, 307 - 330.
Böhme, G., van den Daele, W., and Krohn, W.: 1978, ‘Alternatives in science’, International Journal of Sociology 8, 70–94.
van den Daele, W.: 1977a, ‘Die soziale Konstruktion der Wissenschaft. Institutionalisierung and Definition der positiven Wissenschaft in der zweiten Halfte des 17. Jahrhunderts’, in Böhme, G., van den Daele, W., and Krohn, W. (eds.): Experimentelle Philosophie, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt.
van den Daele, W.: 1977b, ‘The social construction of science. Institutionalization and definition of positive science in the latter half of the seventeenth century’, Sociology of the Sciences 1, 27–54.
Descartes, R.: 1967, ‘Discourse on Method’, in The Philosophical Works of Descartes, trans. E. Haldane and G. R. T. Ross, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Habermas, J.: 1979, Communication and the Evolution of Society, Beacon Press, Boston.
Hill, C.: 1975, The World Turned Upside Down. Radical Ideas During the English Revolution, Penguin, Harmondsworth.
Holorenshaw, H.: 1971, The Levellers and the English Revolution (with a foreword by J. Needham), Howard Fertig, New York.
Hübner, K., Lobkowicz, N., Lubbe, H., and Radnitzky, G. (eds.): 1976, Die politische Herausforderung der Wissenschaft. Gegen eine ideologisch verplante Forschung, Hoffmann and Campe, Hamburg.
Koselleck, R.: 1971, ‘Wozu noch Historie?’, Historische Zeitschrift 212, 1–18.
Koselleck, R.: 1975, ‘Geschichte’, in Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland, Vol. 2, Klett, Stuttgart.
Küppers, G., Lundgren, P., and Weingart, P.: 1978, Umweltforschung - die gesteuerte Wissenschaft?, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt.
Lepenies, W.: 1976, Das Ende der Naturgeschichte. Wandel kultureller Selbstverständlichkeiten in den Wissenschaften des 18. and 19. Jahrhunderts, Hanser, Munich/ Vienna.
Lobkowicz, N.: 1976, ‘Erkenntnisleitende Interessen’, in Hubner et al. (eds.): 1976, Die politische Herausforderung der Wissenschaft, Hoffmann und Campe, Hamburg, pp. 55–65.
Lübbe, H.: 1976, ‘Planung oder Politisierung der Wissenschaft. Zur Kritik einer Kritischen Wissenschaftsphilosophie’, in Hubner, K. et al. (eds.): 1976, Die politische Herausforderung der Wissenschaft, Hoffmann and Campe, Hamburg, pp. 13–23.
Mendelsohn, E.: 1973, ‘A human reconstruction of science’, Boston University Journal, Spring, pp. 45–52.
Marx, K.: 1976, Capital, Vol. I, Penguin, Harmondsworth.
Moscovici, S.: 1968, Essai sur l’histoire humaine de la nature, Flammarion, Paris.
Pfetsch, F.: 1979, ‘The finalization debate in Germany: some comments and explanations’, Social Studies of Science 9, 115–124.
Radnitzky, G.: 1976, ‘Dogmatik and Skepsis: Folgen der Aufgabe der Wahrheitsidee für Wissenschaft and Politik’, in Hubner, K. et al. (eds.): 1976, Die politische Herausforderung der Wissenschaft, Hoffmann and Campe, Hamburg, pp. 24–51.
Ronge, V.: 1978, Die Gesellschaft an den Grenzen der Natur, AJZ-Druck and Verlag, Bielefeld.
Spratt, T.: 1667, History of the Royal Society, edited with critical apparatus by Cope, J. and Jones, H. W., Washington University Studies, 1958.
Tenbruck, F.: 1976, “Wissenschaft and Verwissenschaftlichung”, in Hubner, K. et al. (eds.): 1976, Die politische Herausforderung der Wissenschaft, Hoffmann and Campe, Hamburg, pp. 213–220.
von Weizsäcker, C. F.: 1980, The Unity of Nature, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York.
Winstanley, G.: 1973, The Law of Freedom and Other Writings, Penguin, Harmonds-worth.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1983 D. Reidel Publishing Company
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schäfer, W. (1983). Normative Finalization. In: Schäfer, W. (eds) Finalization in Science. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol 77. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7080-9_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7080-9_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-009-7082-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-7080-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive