This paper considers one recent and continuing set of arguments about the
representation of science, the so-called ‘Science Wars’, and argues that, for a
number of reasons, this dispute has particular strategic value for raising
questions about the discipline of sociology today. These reasons include: the
participation of the sociology of scientific knowledge; the fact that the
dispute is explicitly concerned with disciplinary boundaries, competence and
legitimacy; and the ways in which the dispute connects to related arguments
within sociology. It is argued that whilst much of the debate focuses on an
alleged crisis of reason, the most interesting issue to emerge may rather be a
questioning of the salience of disciplinarity.
BUNGEM
(1996) In praise of intolerance to charlatanism
in academia, in
GrossP.,
LevittN.,
LewisM.
(1996) The Flight from Science and Reason, New
York: New York Academy of Sciences/Johns
Hopkins.
10.
BUNTINGM
(1998) Search for wisdom in all
cultures,Guardian, October 16, 6.
11.
BURNINGHAMK,
and COOPERG
(1999) Being constructive: social
constructionism and the environment,
Sociology, 33(2)
297–316.
12.
BUTTONG, and
SHARROCKW
(1993) A disagreement over agreement and
consensus in constructionist sociology, Journal for
the Theory of Social Behaviour,
23(1)
1–25.
13.
CALLONM
(1999) Whose imposture? Physicists at war with
the third person, Social Studies of
Science, 29(2)
261–286.
14.
COLES
(1996) Voodoo sociology: recent developments in
the sociology of science, in
GrossP.,
LevittN.,
LewisM.
(1996) The Flight from Science and Reason, New
York: New York Academy of Sciences/Johns
Hopkins.
15.
COLLINSH
(1999) Policing science,
Social Studies of Science,
29(2)
287–294.
16.
COLLINSH,
and YEARLEYS
(1992) Epistemological chicken,
in PickeringA.
(editor) Science as Practice and Culture,
Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
17.
DAWKINSR
(1994) The moon is not a
calabash, Times Higher Education
Supplement, September 30, 17.
18.
DERRIDAJ
(1983) The principle of reason: the university
in the eyes of its pupils,Diacritics, Fall,
3–21.
19.
DOUGLASM
(1995) Acceptance,
Science, Technology and Human Values,
20(2)
262–6.
20.
DURKHEIME
(1952) Suicide: a study in sociology,
London:
Routledge.
21.
GIBBONSM,
LIMOGESC,
NOWOTNYH,
SCHWARTZMANS,
SCOTTP, and
TROWM
(1994) The New Production of Knowledge,
London:
Sage.
22.
GIERYNT
(1999) Cultural Boundaries of Science: credibility on
the line, Chicago:
University of Chicago
Press.
23.
GILBERTGN,
and MULKAYM
(1984) Opening Pandora's Box: a sociological analysis
of scientists’ discourse, Cambridge:
Cambridge University
Press.
24.
GROSSP, and
LEVITTN
(1994) Higher Superstition: the academic left and its
quarrels with science, Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins.
25.
GROSSP,
LEVITTN, and
LEWISM
(1996) The Flight from Science and Reason,
New York: New York Academy of
Sciences/Johns Hopkins.
26.
HILGARTNERS
(1997) The Sokal affair in
context, Science, Technology and Human
Values, 22(4)
506–22.
27.
HOLLISM, and
LUKESS (eds)
(1982) Rationality and Relativism,
Oxford:
Blackwell.
28.
HUGHESHS
(1958) Consciousness and Society: the reorientation of
European social thought 1890-1930,
London: MacGibbon and
Kee.
29.
KOERTGEN
(ed) (1998) A House Built on Sand: exposing postmodernist
myths about science, New York:
Oxford University Press.
30.
LATOURB
(1999) Pandora's Hope: essays on the reality of science
studies, Harvard:
Harvard University Press.
31.
LATOURB, and
CALLONM
(1992) Don't throw the baby out with the Bath
School, in
PickeringA.
(editor) Science as Practice and Culture,
Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
32.
LEMERTC
(1997) Postmodernism is Not What You Think,
Oxford,
Blackwell.
33.
LYNCHM
(1993) Scientific Practice and Ordinary
Action, Cambridge:
Cambridge University
Press.
34.
MACKENZIED
(1999) The Science Wars and the past's quiet
voices, Social Studies of Science,
29(2)
199–213.
35.
MERMIND
(1998) The science of science,
Social Studies of Science,
28(4)
603–23.
36.
MOUZELISN
(1995) Sociological Theory: what went wrong?London:
Routledge.
37.
PICKERINGA
(ed) (1992) Science as Practice and Culture,
Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
WINNERL
(1993) Upon opening the black box and finding it
empty: social constructivism and the philosophy of
technology, Science, Technology and Human
Values, 18(3)
362–378.
49.
WOOLGARS,
and COOPERG
(1999) Do artefacts have ambivalence? Moses's
bridges, Winner's bridges and other urban legends in S
&TS, Social Studies of Science,
29(3)
433–449.
50.
WOOLGARS,
and RUSSELLG
(1990) The social basis of troubles with
software: the case of computer viruses,CRICT Discussion Paper 17, Uxbridge.
51.
ZIMANJ
(1994) Prometheus Bound: science in a dynamic steady
state, Cambridge:
Cambridge University
Press.
