|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
- Introduction:
Social sciences, humanities & even the physical & life sciences
struggle to understand how & what we understand: What is knowledge? What is the value of knowledge? Is there a difference btwn truth & knowledge? How do know something is knowledge? correct? "the truth?" etc. |
|
|||
|
|
See Also: An Overview of the Methods of the Social Sciences |
|
|||
|
|
Epistemology: The theory or science of the
- origin - nature - limits of knowledge |
|
|||
| blank | In the West the Culture of Science is such that
Science has become "all powerful" in our culture, making its foibles difficult to acknowledge In our Culture of Science, we are taught that truth/ knowledge is absolute But nothing is absolute |
|
|||
|
|
For most social sciences, knowledge is objective & subjective |
|
|||
|
|
Knowledge is not just facts, it is theories, & conjectures too
We do not keep these straight--we often confuse them Facts are never as independent of theory as we would like them to be Especially in the social sciences |
|
|||
|
|
Knowledge has both an objective & subjective component:
There are no absolute facts |
|
|||
|
|
Subjectivity remains in science because knowledge is framed
by THREE conditions
- ideas - the senses - paradigms |
|
|||
|
|
1. Knowledge is based on ideas
Facts are objective Theories, paradigms & conjectures are subjective But where is the line btwn them? Not clear, because facts are dependent for definition on theory |
|
|||
|
|
2. Knowledge is based on the senses
Illusion: Cannot trust the senses, instruments affect what they measure |
|
|||
|
|
3. Knowledge is based on paradigms
We saw earlier that after a paradigm shift, many fundamentals of knowledge change |
|
|||
|
|
While the soci-historical-politico context of science does not necessary affect sciences' objectivity / subjectivity, it does create bias, which for many people is the same as subjectivity |
|
|||
|
|
Bias affects subjectivity / objectivity through THREE processes |
|
|||
|
|
There are THREE antidotes to bias |
|
|||
|
|
a. A particular soci-historical-politico context impacts what
people in a society
will & will not accept as knowledge / truth Do you believe in multiple dimensions? ghosts? UFOs? the Earth goes around the sun? |
|
|||
|
|
Antidote: Question Knowledge: no blind faith in science: Keep on Questioning "Question Authority" |
|
|||
|
|
b. A particular soci-historical-politico context stratifies the
value of knowledge;
e.g., knowledge about a stock may be of value to Martha Steward the knowledge of how to make a gun full auto may be of value to the Crips Knowledge is controlled based on its value to conflicting groups in society |
|
|||
|
|
Antidote: Ask, "Who benefits from a given bit of knowledge?" |
|
|||
|
|
c. A particular soci-historical-politico context puts particular
people / groups
/ societies in the position to create / destroy / control knowledge |
|
|||
|
|
Antidote: Ask: "Who controls / creates that knowledge?" |
|
|||
|
|
Montesquieu recognized that knowledge was 'contextual' as a result of his extensive travels |
|
|||
|
|
Precautionary rule: Because evidence of harm is uncertain,
& error costs are very high, it is acceptable to take precautionary action |
|
|||
| PR accepts that
- variables used by an analysis may not be firmly defined - in real world science (as opposed to the lab) there is the possibility of multiple cause-effect inferences - circumstantial evidence for cause & effect may be legitimate |
|
||||
| See Also: | ||
| Critique of Science & Knowledge |
|
|
| Culture of Science |
|
|
| Metatheorizing |
|
|
| Montesquieu on the Construction of Knowledge |
|
|
| Luhmann & the Sociology of Knowledge |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|