Skip to content

Reframing Analyses of Science

Pickering foregrounds the practice of Science. This contrasts with much of the traditional commentary of Science which had much more to say about the theoretical content of Science, such as the metaphysical interpretation of Scientific theories and the relationships between conceptual frameworks.

New Inquiries

Like others who refocussed their meta-analysis of Science away from theoretical studies (Latour, Bloor, etc. TBA), Pickering pays attention to Science in practice with the result that new topics of discourse emerge as older disputes fade.

An old debate

For example, consider the well-contested philosophical dispute over the ontological status of Scientific objects - the terms of Scientific theories.

Do Scientific facts match reality?

There are standard realist/anti-realist positions:

  • Realist: Scientific objects are in a substantive sense real; if not exactly as described in theories then partially and, importantly, the descriptive precision gets progressively better as Science evolves. The successes of Science are then easily accounted for by the ontological accurancy (i.e. verisimilitude) of Scientific theories. This view includes associated principles of cumulative knowledge and risible ideas,, which are not uncontroversial.

  • Anti-realist: Scientific objects have no further justification beyond instrumental use. In particular, metaphysical speculation is not epistemically well-founded; indeed such inference lies beyond Science itself. Pessemistic induction, founded on the history of Science, criticises belief in the objects of any particular theory. Successive descriptions of the world do not agree. Kuhn's critique is often cited as definitive evidence against cumulative knowledge. However, this leaves the apparent success of Science unexplained or ignored.

This debate concentrates on in what sense the marks on paper, variables in formulae or words spoken are related to the world. Analyses of the New School (reference TBD) look to the activity of practioners in the lab or conference room or technological application and ask how these relations are made.

Reframing

The question is reframed:

How do Scientific facts come about?

New topics arise concerning the peocess of conceptual criticism internal to Science.

Topics are related to older interests but not the same:

  • Epistemology

old: How does knowledge come about?

new: How is evidence gathered, justified and presented?

  • Rational Character

old: What is the logic of conceptual development?

new: What is the process of dispute and agreement?

  • Historical Influence

old: How does Science affect wider society?

new: How does wider society influence Science?

These topics are not about symbols and interpretation; these are questions of human processes. Gathering data by what means? Who is justifying and to whom? What is agreeing? The active lamguage of verbs ha replaced static nouns.