Bibliography
Golinski, J. (2005). Making Natural Knowledge: Constructivism and the History of Science. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.
Jan Golinski looks to shed some light on historical views of constructivism in science. Constructivists argue that scientific facts are not discovered but are created based on social factors affecting individual scientists and the greater scientific community. After essays on issues raised by constructionism and some of the general related ideas, he clarifies typical arguments concerning social identity for scientists. For example, how they view themselves, how their self-view is disciplined among members of larger scientific community, and who is even a part of that community.
Golinski continues along the line of examining the workplaces of scientists, how they are organized and funded. He refers to scientific laboratories as ‘places of production’ of knowledge. Clearly that is different than how many scientists view labs as places of discovery. He spends a whole chapter viewing ideas of Ian Hacking, a scientific philosopher whose works I’ve read a few of. Hacking devoted a great deal of study on the ideas of intervening with nature and representing the outcomes of those interventions. For example, is the atomic model of electrons spinning around a neutron a representation of what an atom actually looks like, or just a way to explain the measured phenomena? Do chemical substances in nature actually interact with each other the way they do in a lab where specific components are isolated from each other before being mixed in unnatural rations? Constructivists argue that without human intervention such behavior is not natural. They also argue that human representation (such as using mathematics) only partially describes the intervening version and not natural processes.
“The issue of narrative, with its connection to the moral meaning of historical discourse, is an important one to consider in the light of constructivist approaches to the history of science” (Golinski, 2005, p. 187). Golinski is looking at the history of constructivism in science as well as the history of the history of constructivism in science.
Golinski, J. (2005). Making Natural Knowledge: Constructivism and the History of Science. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.
Jan Golinski looks to shed some light on historical views of constructivism in science. Constructivists argue that scientific facts are not discovered but are created based on social factors affecting individual scientists and the greater scientific community. After essays on issues raised by constructionism and some of the general related ideas, he clarifies typical arguments concerning social identity for scientists. For example, how they view themselves, how their self-view is disciplined among members of larger scientific community, and who is even a part of that community.
Golinski continues along the line of examining the workplaces of scientists, how they are organized and funded. He refers to scientific laboratories as ‘places of production’ of knowledge. Clearly that is different than how many scientists view labs as places of discovery. He spends a whole chapter viewing ideas of Ian Hacking, a scientific philosopher whose works I’ve read a few of. Hacking devoted a great deal of study on the ideas of intervening with nature and representing the outcomes of those interventions. For example, is the atomic model of electrons spinning around a neutron a representation of what an atom actually looks like, or just a way to explain the measured phenomena? Do chemical substances in nature actually interact with each other the way they do in a lab where specific components are isolated from each other before being mixed in unnatural rations? Constructivists argue that without human intervention such behavior is not natural. They also argue that human representation (such as using mathematics) only partially describes the intervening version and not natural processes.
“The issue of narrative, with its connection to the moral meaning of historical discourse, is an important one to consider in the light of constructivist approaches to the history of science” (Golinski, 2005, p. 187). Golinski is looking at the history of constructivism in science as well as the history of the history of constructivism in science.
RSS Feed