Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Scientific Ideology and Scientific Process: The Natural History of a Conceptual Shift

  • Chapter
The Social Production of Scientific Knowledge

Part of the book series: Sociology of the Sciences A Yearbook ((SOSC,volume 1))

Abstract

This paper attempts to outline the process and significance of a shift from a positivist to a social and historical understanding of science. From the viewpoint of an adherent to the new perspective, the positivist model appears as an external, philosophers’ image of what is natural science, one which takes at face value what its spokesmen, and to a lesser degree what its practitioners say it is. To identify this line of externally addressed philosophy of science and internalist intellectual history, I would mention Bacon, Sarton, Cohen, Popper and the logical positivists generally. Even recent and formidable sociologists of science (Merton, Ben-David) share key elements of the positivist assumption, that positivism is an accurate reflection of scientific practice and that science is intellectually and internally self-determined (autonomous).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. Juan E. Corradi, Textures: Approaching Society, Ideology and Literature’, Occasional Papers No. 19. Ibero-American Language and Area Center, New York University, New York, N.Y., March, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Joseph Ben-David, ‘Is there a Sociology of Knowledge?’ Working Paper No. 136, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the University of Chicago, mimeo, 1969; The Scientist’s Role in Society, A Comparative Study, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1971, pp. 7–11.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Michael Polanyi, Personal Knowledge, New York: Harper & Row, 2nd ed., 1964, p.x.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Michael Polanyi, Personal Knowledge, New York: Harper & Row, 2nd ed., 1964, p.x.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ibid., p.x.

    Google Scholar 

  7. M. J. Mulkay, ‘Three Models of Scientific Development’, The Sociological Review 23, 3. August, 1975 pp 509–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. W. O. Hagstrom, The Scientific Community, New York, N.Y.: Basic Books, 1975, pp. 224–225.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Nicholas Mullins, ‘The Development of a Scientific Specialty: The Phage Group and the Origin of Molecular Biology’, Minerva 10, January, 1972, pp. 51–82.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ian I. Mitroff, The Subjective Side of Science, Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Peter Buck, ‘Orientations Toward Occidental Knowledge: Comparative Perspectives on the Science Society of China, 1914–1937’, unpub. Ph.D. diss. Harvard University, 1972

    Google Scholar 

  12. ‘Science, Revolution, and Imperialism: Current Chinese and Western Views of Scientific Development’, Proceedings of the XIV Congress of the History of Science, Tokyo, 1974

    Google Scholar 

  13. ‘Order and Control: The Scientific Method in China and the United States’, Social Studies of Science 5, 1975, pp. 237–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. E. Mendelsohn, ‘Physical Models and Physiological Concepts: Explanation in Nineteenth Century Biology’, The British Journal for the History of Science 2, 7, 1965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. ‘Revolution and Reduction: The Sociology of Methodological and Philosophy Concerns in 19th Century Biology’, mimeo, January 1972

    Google Scholar 

  16. E. Mendelsohn and A. Thackray, (eds.) Science and Human Values, New York, N.Y.: Humanities Press, 1974

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lewis Feuer, Einstein and the Generations of Science, New York: Basic Books, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ian I. Mitroff, ‘Norms and Counter-Norms in a Select Group of the Apollo Moon Scientists: A Case Study of the Ambivalence of Scientists’, American Sociological Review 39, 1974, pp. 579–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Robert K. Merton, The Sociology of Science, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973, p. 270.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Joseph Needham, ‘History and Human Values: A Chinese Perspective for World Science and Technology’, a paper given at the Canadian Association of Asian Studies Annual Conference, Montreal, Quebec, May 1975, p. 31.

    Google Scholar 

  21. T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2nd ed., 1970, p. 171.

    Google Scholar 

  22. R. K. Merton, The Sociology of Science; op. cit., 1973, Note 9, p. 273.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Roger G. Krohn, ‘Patterns of the Institutionalization of Research’, in S. A. Nagi and R.G.Corwin (eds.) Social Context of Research, New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  24. R. K. Merton, The Sociology of Knowledge; op. cit., p. 273.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ian I. Mitroff, ‘Norms and Counternorms…’; op. cit.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Marcel Mauss, The Gift: forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies, London: Cohen and West Ltd., 1954, pp. 37–40.

    Google Scholar 

  27. R. K. Merton, The Sociology of Science; op. cit. p. 276.

    Google Scholar 

  28. ibid., p. 216.

    Google Scholar 

  29. ibid., p. 278.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Michael Polanyi, Personal Knowledge; op. cit., p. X.

    Google Scholar 

  31. T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions; op. cit., p. 94.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ian I. Mitroff, ‘Norms and Counter-Norms’, op. cit., p. 592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions; op. cit., p. 77.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Joseph Ben-David, The Scientist’s Role in Society, op. cit., ch. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Friedrich Paulsen, The German University and University Study (translated by F. Thilly and W. Elang), New York: Longman-Green, 1906, pp. 50–61.

    Google Scholar 

  36. ibid., p. 53.

    Google Scholar 

  37. ibid., pp. 65–66.

    Google Scholar 

  38. J. D. Bernal, The Social Functions of Science, New York: Macmillan Co., 1939

    Google Scholar 

  39. Science in History, London: C.A. Watts & Co., 1954

    Google Scholar 

  40. B. Hessen, The Social and Economic Roots of Newton’s Principia’, in Science and the Crossroads, London, 1931; republished by Cass, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Ben-David, The Scientist’s Role in Society; op. cit., pp. 158ff.

    Google Scholar 

  42. For example see: Jim Hightower, Hard Tomatoes, Hard Times: A Report of the Agribusiness Accountability Project on the Failure of America’s Land Grant College Complex, Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman, 1973

    Google Scholar 

  43. Andre Mayer and Jean Mayer, ‘Agriculture, the Island Empire’, Daedalus 103, 1974, p. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Joseph Ben-David, The Scientist’s Role in Society; op. cit., 1971

    Google Scholar 

  45. Note 2. Gerald Gordon, ‘Freedom, Visibility, and Scientific Innovation’, American Journal of Sociology 70, 1966, pp. 195–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. I was first drawn to this interpretation by a study of the sociological classics, especially A. Smith, St. Simon, Marx, Durkheim, and Weber. Each can be seen to have devoted his working life to a single major national or European social problem of his time. But this is the topic of another paper.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Peter Buck, ‘Science, Revolution, and Imperialism’, op. cit., 1974

    Google Scholar 

  48. Note 7. Science for the People, a periodical, Boston, Mass., 1970 and forward.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Rene Dubos, So Human An Animal, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  50. The Society for Freedom in Science strongly articulated this faith in response to Bernal’s position below: See The Society for Freedom in Sciences, Its Origins, Objects, and Constitution, Oxford, England: Potter Press, 2nd Ed., 1953, and Society for Freedom in Science, Occasional Pamphlets, Nos. 1–13. 1945–1952.

    Google Scholar 

  51. J. D. Bernai, The Social Functions of Science; op, cit., 1939, Note 28.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Gerald Gordon, ‘Freedom, Visibility, and Scientific Innovation’, op. cit., 1966, Note 31, pp. 195–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. ‘Preconceptions and Reconceptions in the Administration of Science’, Proceedings of the Second Conference on Research Program Effectiveness, Department of the Navy, Office of Naval Research, New York: Gordon and Breach Publishers, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Joseph Ben-David, The Scientist’s Role in Society; op. cit., 1971, Note 2. p. 57.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Robert K. Merton, The Sociology of Science; op. cit., 1973, Note 9, p. 366. (first published in 1961.)

    Google Scholar 

  56. ibid., p. 368.

    Google Scholar 

  57. T. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions; op. cit., 1970, Note 11.

    Google Scholar 

  58. M.J.Mulkay, ‘Three Models of Scientific Development’, op. cit., 1975, Note 5, p. 521

    Google Scholar 

  59. and Diana Crane, Invisible Colleges: Diffusion of Knowledge in Scientific Communities, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  60. The Oxford Universal Dictionary (ed. by C. T. Onions), Oxford: Clarendon Press, 3rd ed., 1955.

    Google Scholar 

  61. S. W. Woolgar, ‘Writing an Intellectual History of Scientific Development: the Use of Discovery Accounts’, Social Studies of Science 6, 1976, pp. 395–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. ibid., p. 32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. The Oxford Universal Dictionary; op. cit.

    Google Scholar 

  64. See for example L. Sklair, Organized Knowledge, A Sociological View of Science and Technology, London: Hart-Davis, MacGibbon, 1973

    Google Scholar 

  65. S. Blume, Towards a Political Sociology of Science, New York: The Free Press, 1974

    Google Scholar 

  66. J. Ravetz, Scientific Knowledge and Its Social Problems, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  67. See for example, M. J. Mulkay et al., ‘Problem Areas and Research Networks in Science’, Sociology 9, May 1975, p. 2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Ian I. Mitroff, The Subjective Side of Science-, op. cit., 1974, Note 6.

    Google Scholar 

  69. J. D. Watson, The Double Helix, New York: Athenaeum Publishers, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  70. ibid., p. ix.

    Google Scholar 

  71. ibid., p. 208.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Robert Olby, The Path to the Double Helix, Seattle: The University of Washington Press, 1974

    Google Scholar 

  73. Anne Sayre, Rosalind Franklin and DNA, New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  74. James D. Watson, The Double Helix; op. cit., 1968, Note 48, p. 208.

    Google Scholar 

  75. ibid., p. 111.

    Google Scholar 

  76. ibid., p. 208.

    Google Scholar 

  77. ibid., pp. 100–101.

    Google Scholar 

  78. ibid., p. 121.

    Google Scholar 

  79. ibid., p. 22.

    Google Scholar 

  80. ibid., p. 33.

    Google Scholar 

  81. ibid., pp. 36–38.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Anne Sayre, Rosalind Franklin and DNA; op. cit., pp. 125–128.

    Google Scholar 

  83. James D. Watson, The Double Helix; op. cit., 1968, Note 48, pp. 51–52.

    Google Scholar 

  84. ibid., p 181.

    Google Scholar 

  85. ibid., pp. 190ff.

    Google Scholar 

  86. ibid., p. 194.

    Google Scholar 

  87. ibid., p. 51.

    Google Scholar 

  88. ibid., p. 196.

    Google Scholar 

  89. ibid., p. 94.

    Google Scholar 

  90. ibid., pp. 126–128.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Thanks to the suggestion of Peter Buck, and for several other unfootnoted suggestions.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. McGill University, Canada

    Roger G. Krohn

Authors
  1. Roger G. Krohn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Everett Mendelsohn Peter Weingart Richard Whitley

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1977 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht-Holland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Krohn, R.G. (1977). Scientific Ideology and Scientific Process: The Natural History of a Conceptual Shift . In: Mendelsohn, E., Weingart, P., Whitley, R. (eds) The Social Production of Scientific Knowledge. Sociology of the Sciences A Yearbook, vol 1. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1186-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1186-0_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-277-0776-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-010-1186-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation