HLST200 Lecture 1: hlst404unit1
2 Jun 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Unit #1
1. describe some of the problems associated with producing a definition of science.
This latter issue—the question of the social construction of science—led to the “science wars,” a long,
heated, and often bitter debate during the 1990s. On one side of the battle stood the “postmodernists” and
their supporters from a range of disciplines who argued that there was no such thing as scientific
objectivity or Truth. The postmodernist school contended that science was essentially socially constructed
and that it often served elitist ends or hidden agendas of one sort or another. On the other side of the
battle were the “realists,” primarily scientists and their supporters, who held fast to the idea that science
was objective. The realists charged that the postmodernists often knew nothing about the science they
criticized; some scientists charged that the postmodernists were criticizing science for their own political
ends (Gross and Levitt).
1. describe and explain the difference between “weak” and “strong” approaches to the social
construction of scientific knowledge.
The SSK approach uses a relativistic analatical framework that stresses that failed
or false scientific theories deserve as much attention as true or successful ones and
that one must examine carefully the social context in which scientist work. To the
irritation of scientist the relativist approach was, in some cases taken to
extremes.The weak programme is more of a description of an approach than an
organised movement. The term is applied to historians, sociologists and philosophers
of science who merely cite sociological factors as being responsible for those beliefs
that went wrong. The strong programme is particularly associated with the work of
two groups: the 'Edinburgh School' (David Bloor, Barry Barnes, and their colleagues
at the Science Studies Unit at the University of Edinburgh) in the 1970s and '80s,
and the 'Bath School' (Harry Collins and others at the University of Bath) in the same
period. Those associated with the weak programme would hardly describe
themselves using this term, which is clearly invidious; still, strong
programme advocates are thinking of the "weak program" when they lump together
historians, sociologists and philosophers of science cite sociological factors only
when a scientific effort fails. Imre Lakatos and (in some moods) Thomas
Kuhn might be said to adhere to it.
2. appraise and differentiate the fundamental approaches to the study of the history of
science of Thomas Kuhn, Karl Popper, and Robert K. Merton.
Karl Popper (1924-1994) — Argued that falsifiability is both the hallmark of
scientific theories and the proper methodology for scientists to employ. He believed
that scientists should always regard their theories with a skeptical eye, seeking every
opportunity to try to falsify them. Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996) — Historian and
philosopher who argued that the picture of science developed by logical empiricists
such as Popper didn't resemble the history of science. Kuhn famously distinguished
Document Summary
Unit #1: describe some of the problems associated with producing a definition of science. This latter issue the question of the social construction of science led to the science wars, a long, heated, and often bitter debate during the 1990s. On one side of the battle stood the postmodernists and their supporters from a range of disciplines who argued that there was no such thing as scientific objectivity or truth. The postmodernist school contended that science was essentially socially constructed and that it often served elitist ends or hidden agendas of one sort or another. On the other side of the battle were the realists, primarily scientists and their supporters, who held fast to the idea that science was objective. The ssk approach uses a relativistic analatical framework that stresses that failed or false scientific theories deserve as much attention as true or successful ones and that one must examine carefully the social context in which scientist work.
