Who Studies the Studies of Science and Technology? On the Principle of Reflexivity from Empirical and Theoretical Points of View

Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 59 (4):21-30 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The article discusses the methodological principle of reflexivity as formulated within the strong program of the sociology of scientific knowledge. The applicability of this principle in science and technology studies is analyzed from empirical and theoretical points of view. The principle of reflexivity expresses the requirement of scientific universalism: it forbids the exclusion of one’s own cognitive activity and its results from the world totality of objectively observable things and processes, in this case – beliefs. In D. Bloor’s imperative formulation, the principle prescribes applying the explanatory methodology of the strong program in relation to the strong program’s own fundamental theoretical and methodological concepts. The implementation of this principle in STS faces practical problems and theoretical paradoxes. In line with the methodology of the strong program, the author asks the question about the social conditions of the failure of the principle of reflexivity. The author shows that empirically cognizable social conditions for the realization of the principle of reflexivity can be fulfilled. However, their fulfillment does not lead to reflexive work, which presupposes an external position of the one who explains in relation to what is explained. In accordance with the postpositivist concept of the underdetermination of theory by facts, the external position is achieved through the speculative transition from the factual given to the hypothesis explaining this given. The author shows that the external position taken by internal critics of the STS research community becomes the position of speculative philosophy.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,991

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Shahryari on Bloor and the Strong Program.Finn Collin - 2022 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 11 (3):70-76.
Philosophical Reflexivity in Psychological Science: Do We Have It? Does It Matter?Kathleen Slaney, Donna Tafreshi & Charlie A. Wu - 2019 - In Kieran C. O'Doherty, Lisa M. Osbeck, Ernst Schraube & Jeffery Yen (eds.), Psychological Studies of Science and Technology. Springer Verlag. pp. 237-256.
On the Universality of Philosophical Reflection: Reply to Critics.Olga E. Stoliarova - 2022 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 59 (4):50-54.
The Question of Reflexivity.Marketa Jakešova - 2019 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 56 (2):167-180.
"Situated knowledge" and the ideal of objectivity in science.Elena O. Trufanova - 2017 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 54 (4):99-110.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-11-17

Downloads
6 (#1,483,753)

6 months
3 (#1,046,148)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references