Science Studies

Introduction

Science Studies.

Probing the Dynamics of Scientific Knowledge SABINE MAASEN AND MATTHIAS WINTERHAGER

Eugenics — Looking at the Role of Science Anew

A Statistical Viewpoint on the Testing of Historical Hypotheses: The Case of Eugenics

Humanities — Inquiry Into the Growing Demand for Histories

Making Sense WOLFGANG PRINZ

Bibliometrics - Monitoring Emerging Fields

A Bibliometric Methodology for Exploring

Interdisciplinary, ‘Unorthodox’ Fields of Science.

A Case Study of Environmental Medicine ANTHONY F.J. van Raan, MARTIJN S. VISSER, AND THED N. VAN LEEUWEN

Science Policy - Making Universities Cope with Science Today

German Universities on the Threshold of the Twenty-First Century WILHELM KRULL

Evolutionary Theory and the Social Sciences —

Increasingly a Mutual Exchange 145 Culture is Part of Human Biology.

Why the Superorganic Concept Serves

the Human Sciences Badly

PETER J. RICHERSON AND ROBERT BOYD 147 Climatology - Innovative Research Strategies

in a Dynamic Field 179 Making Ice Talk: Notes from a Participant Observer

on Climate Research in Antarctica

AANT ELZINGA 181 Metaphors - Moving Targets in the (Social) Sciences 213 Why Metaphor? Toward a Metaphorics

of Scientific Practice

James J. Bono 215 Science and the Public - Pushing PUS with Science Studies 235 What Kind of ‘Public Understanding of Science’

Programs Best Serve a Democracy?

Bruce V. LEWENSTEIN 237 Knowledge Politics - The Paradox of Regulating

Knowledge Dynamics 257 Policing Knowledge

Nico STEHR 259 Indices 291 Subjects 291 Authors 297

SCIENCE STUDIES PROBING THE DYNAMICS OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE

SABINE MAASEN AND MATTHIAS WINTERHAGER

“The sociology of science, once marginal, has become a growth industry practiced by an increasing number of scholars ... It often comes as the nucleus of the so-called STS (science, technology, and society) programs and centers” (Bunge 1991a: 524). While this observation is shared in principle by a growing number of colleagues, both science studies and sociology of science, in particular, only rarely have been introduced in a systematic and easily accessible fashion." Maybe due to its enormous success, the field of science studies rather commits itself to studying the varıous phenomena accompanying societies that differentiate specific systems, institutions, and practices to produce systematic knowledge rather than to self-reflection, or even less, to introducing itself. At the same time, however, due to its success, science studies has become a field that cannot be described but as heterogeneous. From the 1960s onward, and with a special thrust in the 1980s, science studies conquered novel territories (e.g., science policy, PUS, cultural studies), has employed various methodologies (e.g., discourse analysis, ethnomethodology, bibliometrics) and theories (e.g., network-theories), inquired into epistemological questions (e.g., reflexivity in sociology of knowledge) as well as into the instruments of research (e.g., the experiment) and - last but not least — has become institutionalized in wide range of departments and programs.” The expert in the field may take this lightly: “Although science studies cannot ‘control’ its subject matter, it can pick its methodologies and research questions very broadly and yet remain a recognizable field” (Bagioli 1999: xiv). The novice to the field, however, may shrink back from the double trend toward disunity’ (Bagioli): As sience studies progresses, it further disunifies itself and the picture of science it studies. Hence the urgency and difficulty of finding a path through this jungle.’

Finding a path, however, cannot possibly mean ‘unification’ of science studies (cf. Galison 1996) but rather attempts to give an idea of what this interdisciplinary field, predominantly populated by sociologists, historians and philosophers of science‘, is all about. In this vein, one can basically choose between two options: Either try and write a comprehensive overview, necessarily sketchy if it comes to the details of each single approach. In this way one gets a map of science studies designed for preliminary orientiation in the field. Alternatively, one can select one overarching concern and probe more deeply into its various aspects, thereby learning about science studies per exemplum.

Basically, this book has been set up according to the latter option: We chose one overarching concern, namely the dynamics of scientific knowledge, and present nine self-contained studies that touch upon this concern in highly different ways: They encompass the whole range of scientific cultures: the natural and social sciences as well as the humanities; they cover issues as diverse as climate research (Aant Elzinga), historiography (Wolfgang Prinz), and methods such as bibliometrics (Anthony van Raan) as well as the role of metaphor in science (James J. Bono). Their heterogeneity notwithstanding, the studies presented all inquire into, or are themselves examples of, the dynamics of scientific knowledge. Moreover, the types of dynamics analyzed or exhibited not only result from intrascientific but from extrascientific processes as well: As to the former, Diane Paul, for instance, explores the use of biostatistical concepts in tracing the history of eugenics, hence, inquires into the heuristic value of analytic tools that have been developed in another discipline. In a similar manner, Peter J. Richerson and Rob Boyd advance the analysis of human culture by analogizing cultural to biological evolution. Other scholars investigate the dynamics resulting from extrascientific exchange: Nico Stehr ponders the need for a so-called ‘knowledge politics’ and Bruce Lewenstein critically discusses the emergence of what has become known as ‘public understanding of science.’ Last but not least, Wilhelm Krull testifies to the way in which science policy makes use of those (online-)observations of the dynamics of scientific knowledge production that science studies provide. Summarizing, although each article represents a self-contained study, the collection as a whole sheds light on one of the most intriguing phenomenon in the field of science studies today: the dynamics of scientific knowledge.

However, we will not leave the readers all alone in their attempt to make their way through the individual contributions. Instead, we will first introduce the overarching issue, that is, why ‘dynamics of scientific knowledge’, and embed this question in the broader context of science studies (cf. “Science Studies - Dynamics of a Field”). Second,

Io each single contribution will be characterized as regards its connection to the overarching issue (cf. “Nine Studies in Science”). Third, throughout the book, each article will be preceded by a little vignette integrating each study into its broader context of research. Thus, in the end, we try and save a little of the former option of writing this book and do both: give a sketchy map of science studies and probe more deeply into some of its territories.

Why ‘Dynamics of Scientific Knowledge’?

Knowledge in a Knowledge Society

Knowledge has become a major concern in many of today’s societies. Consequently, this concern is no longer confined to those who produce it but it is also the daily business for those who organize, communicate, regulate, and use it. In fact, the increasing significance of knowledge has already led to a new label: ‘knowledge society,’ indicating that knowledge and society are mutually constitutive for each other. What are the defining characteristics?

- Knowlege is seen as a central, if not primary resource for societal reproduction, thus neighbouring, if not prioritizing money and power, the two other key resources driving the engine called society.

- In particular, this is indicated by the increase of knowledge-based professions that currently spread into ever-more parts of contemporary societies. On the collective level, expertises abound and compete. On the individual level, this translates into acquiring a portfolio of expertises throughout one’s career.

- Developments such as the ones mentioned above are said to be caused by several processes: e.g., by the scientification of knowledge, the globalization of data and information networks, as well as by the growing perception of risk and contingency which significantly increases both the supply of and the demand for knowledge.

— This not only leads to new ways of dealing with the constant flux of knowledge (i.e., ‘lifelong learning’), it also directs critical reflection to the source of data, information, and knowledge: science. Deeply entrenched with other subsystems of society (e.g., economics, politics, law) it co-produces both benefits and risks for individual and collective actors.