The concept of “science” usually includes commitments to reason, objectivity, and disinterest in the search for truth about the nature of the world. In this view, politics, in the sense of maneuvering to gain power, corrupts both the process and the product of science. However, we show that science is political through and through—in the process of constructing scientific knowledge in maintaining disciplines and in being responsive to partisan sponsorship. Nevertheless, the practitioners of both science and politics maintain the boundary between the two fields; in fact, the disciplines most dependent upon government support tend also to be the most autonomous. This situation becomes understandable when both fields are considered as discursive practices. Then scientific debates can be seen as productive precisely because they derive from an objective agreement about science as an autonomous intellectual enterprise and science itself can be seen as a politics of truth.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BecherT.1989. Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultures of Disciplines.Milton Keynes, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education/Open University Press.
2.
BledsteinB. J.1957. The Culture of Professionalism: The Middle Class and the Development of Higher Education in America.New York: W. W. Norton.
3.
BloorD.1976. Knowledge and Social Imagery.London: Routhledge and Kegan Paul.
4.
BourdieuP.1981. “The Specificity of the Scientific Field.” Pp. 86–96 in French Sociology: Rupture and Renewal since 1968, edited by LemertC. C.New York: Columbia University Press.
5.
BourdieuP.1990. “Animadversiones in Mertonem.” Pp. 297–302 in Robert K. Merton: Consensus and Controversy, edited by ClarkJ.ModgilC.ModgilS.London: Palmer.
6.
BourdieuP.1991. “The Peculiar History of Scientific Reason.”Sociological Forum6(1):3–26.
7.
BourdieuP.1996. The State Nobility. Translated by CloughL.London, UK: Polity.
8.
BourdieuP.WacquantL. J. D.1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
9.
BrownJ. R.2001. Who Rules in Science? An Opinionated Guide to the Wars.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10.
BrownR. H.1987. Society as Text: Essays on Rhetoric, Reason, and Reality.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
11.
BrownR. H.1989. A Poetic for Sociology: Toward a Logic of Discovery for the Human Sciences.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
12.
BrownR. H.1998. Toward a Democratic Science: Scientific Narration and Civic Communication.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
13.
BushV. [1945] 1960. Science, the Endless Frontier: A Report to the President on a Program for Postwar Scientific Research. Reprint. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
ChubinD. E.1988. “Allocating Credit and Blame in Science.”Science, Technology, and Human Values13:53–63.
16.
CollinsR.1998. The Social Causes of Philosophies.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17.
CozzensS. E.WoodhouseE. J.1995. “Science, Government, and the Politics of Knowledge. Pp. 533–53 in Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, edited by JasanoffS.MarkleG. E.PetersenJ. C.PinchT.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
CrookS.JanP.WatersM.1992. Postmodernization: Change in Advanced Society.London, UK: Sage.
19.
De KruifP.1926. Microbe Hunters.New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.
20.
ElzingaA.1985. “Research, Bureaucracy, and the Drift of Epistemic Criteria.” Pp. 191–220 in The University Research System: The Public Policies of the Home of Scientists, edited by WittrockB.ElzingasA.Stockholm, Sweden: Almquist and Wiksell.
21.
FeyerabendP.1978. Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge.London, UK: Verso.
22.
FitzhughG.1854. Sociology for the South or The failure of free Society.Richmond, VA: A. Moons.
23.
FoucaultM.1980. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977.New York: Pantheon.
24.
FuchsS.1992. The Professional Quest for Truth: A Social Theory of Science and Knowledge.Albany: State University New York Press.
25.
FuchsS.WardS.1994. “What is Deconstruction and Where and When Does it Take Place?”American Sociological Review59:481–500.
26.
FullerS.1988. Social Epistemology.Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
27.
GierynT.1983. “Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists.”American Sociological Review48:781–95.
28.
GierynT.1995. “Boundaries of Science.” Pp. 393–443 in Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, edited by JasanoffS.MarkleG. E.PetersenJ. C.PinchT.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29.
GilbertG. N.MulkayM.1984. Opening Pandora's Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientists’ Discourse.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30.
GreenbergD. S.1968. The Politics of Pure Science.New York: New American Library.
31.
GrossA. G.1990. The Rhetoric of Science.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32.
HallidayM. A. K.1978. Language as Social Semiotic.London, UK: Arnold.
33.
JasanoffS.1992. “Science, Politics, and the Renegotiation of Expertise at EPA.”Osiris7:195–217.
34.
Knorr-CetinaK. D.1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science.Oxford: Pergamon Press.
35.
Knorr-CetinaK. D.1999. Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
36.
LatourB.1993. The Pasteurization of France.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37.
LatourB.WoolgarS.1986. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
38.
LernerD.1959. Human Meaning of the Social Sciences.New York: Meridian.
39.
ManicasP.1987. A History and Philosophy of the Social Sciences.London, UK: Basil Blackwell.
40.
MilofskyK.1991. “Writing and Seeing: Is There Any Sociology Here?” Pp. 35–49 in The Rhetoric of Social Research, edited by HunterA.New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
41.
MulkayM.GilbertG. N.1982. “Accounting for Error: How Scientists Construct Their World When They Account for Correct and Incorrect Beliefs.”Sociology16:165–83.
42.
MulkayM.PotterJ.YearleyS.1983. “Why an Analysis of Scientific Discourse Is Important.” Pp. 171–203 in Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study of Science, edited by Knorr-CetinaK. D.MulkayM.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
43.
National Science Foundation (NSF)2002. Federal Funds for Research and Development: Fiscal Years 2000, 2001, and 2002.Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics.
44.
PelsD.1995. “Intellectual Autonomy: Toward a Political Ethics of Knowledge.”Department of Sociology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Holland. Unpublished manuscript.
45.
PopperK.1963. Conjectures and Refutation: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge.London, UK: Routledge.
46.
RavetzJ. R. [1971] 1996. Scientific Knowledge and Its Social Problems.New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
47.
RichardsS.1987. Philosophy and Sociology of Science: An Introduction.Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
48.
RouseJ.1987. Knowledge and Power: Toward a Political Philosophy of Science.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
49.
SarewitzD.1996. Frontiers of Illusion: Science, Technology, and the Politics of Progress.Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
50.
SchrumW.1988. “Review Essay: The Labyrinth of Science.”American Journal of Sociology2(September):386–403.
51.
ShapinS.1990. “Science and the Public.” In Companion to the History of Modern Science, edited by OlbyR. C.London: Routledge.
52.
ShapinS.1994. A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seventeenth-Century England.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
53.
SoleyL. C.1995. Leasing the Ivory Tower: The Corporate Takeover of Academia.Boston, MA: South End Press.
54.
StinchcombeA. L.1990. Information and Organizations.Berkeley: University of California Press.
55.
SwatezG. U.1970. “The Social Organization of a University Laboratory.”Minerva8(January):36–58.
56.
VicoG. [1744] 1972. The New Science of Giambattista Vico. Translated by BerginT. G.FrischM. H.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
57.
WeberM.1978. “Science as a Vocation.” Pp. 77–156 in GerthH.MillsC. W., eds., From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology.New York: Oxford.
58.
WoolgarS.1988. Science: The Very Idea.London, UK: Tavistock.
59.
WoollettE. L.1980. “Physics and Modern Warfare: The Awkward Silence.”American Journal of Physics48(2):104–11.
