Stephen Turner complains about weaknesses of Robert K. Merton's teachings without noticing that these are common. He puts down Merton's ideas despite his innovations, on the ground that they are not successful and not sufficiently revolutionary. The criteria by which he condemns Merton are too vague and too high. Merton's merit is in his having put the sociology of science on the map and drawn attention to the egalitarianism that was prominent in classical science and that is now diminished.
Agassi, Joseph.1963. Towards an historiography of science. Reprinted in Agassi, Science and its history: A reassessment of the historiography of science, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 253, Dordrecht : Springer, pp. 119-242.
2.
---. 1975. Science in Flux. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science80: 73-80.
3.
---. 2008. A philosopher's apprentice: In Karl Popper's workshop . 2nd ed., rev. and ext. Amsterdam : Rodopi.
4.
Bacon, Francis.1605. The advancement of learning.
5.
Bacon, Sir Francis. 1620. Novum organum.
6.
Boudon, Raymond.1977. Review of [Coser, 1975]. American Journal of Sociology82:1356-61.
7.
Clark, Jon, Celia Modgil, and Sohan Modgil, 1990. Robert Merton: Consensus and Controversy, London: Falmer.
8.
Coser, Lewis A., ed. 1975. The idea of social structure: Papers in honor of Robert K. Merton. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
9.
Duhem, Pierre, 1954/1914. The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
10.
Durkheim, Emile, and Marcel Mauss.1963/1903. Primitive classifications. Translation and introduction by Rodney Needham. Chicago : Chicago University Press.
