Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

The Social Location of Scientific Practices

Bibliographic Data

ID20066767
AuthorsHugh Lacey (0000-0002-7037-0088, corresponding author)
Year2016
Pages145-174
Publication date2016-12-05
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeCHAPTER
VenueHistory, Historicity and Science (SOURCE_BOOK)
PublisherRoutledge (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.4324/9781315253282-12
OpenAlexW967403219
ISBN9781315253282
LanguageEN

The mainstream tradition of modern science denies the historicity of scientific practices. It denies that their character changes, and must change, in fundamental ways that arise historically, and that are responsive to and shaped significantly by varying circumstances. In Section 1 I will identify several presuppositions that have been commonly used to support this denial: most notably, that the object of science is ahistorical and its methodology essentially unchanging, and that the character of basic scientific methodology is not dialectically linked with applied science. In Section 2 Kuhn’s rejection of the presuppositions about the object and unchanging methodology of science will be endorsed, thus providing support for what Margolis has referred to as a ‘remarkable (but somewhat muffled)’ version of the historicity of science.2 Then, in Section 3, drawing upon a detailed analysis of a contemporary controversy between agrobiotechnology and agroecology, I will move beyond Kuhn and also reject the other presupposition that there are no dialectical links between methodology and application

Geography · Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae