|
Article Excerpt
WENDA K. BAUCHSPIES, JENNIFER CROISSANT and SAL RESTIVO, Science, Technology, and Society: A Sociological Approach. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 2005, xiii + 149 p., Index.
MATTHEW DAVID, Science in Society. Houndmills, U.K.: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, xiii + 199 p., Index.
MARK ERICKSON, Science, Culture and Society: Understanding Science in the 21st Century. Cambridge, Mass.: Polity Press, 2005, xi + 241 p., Index.
DANIEL LEE KLEINMAN, Science and Technology in Society: From Biotechnology to the Internet. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 2005, x + 141 p., Index.
SERGIO SISMONDO, An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 2004, vii + 202 p., Index.
STEVEN YEARLEY, Making Sense of Science: Understanding the Social Study of Science. London, U.K.: Sage, 2005, xv + 205 p., Index.
Texts on science and technology studies have recently proliferated. The six under review are the latest, but by no means the only, ones that have appeared in the last three years. I have focussed on books that are written by sociologists and are particularly, though not exclusively, addressed to social science students. In analysing science and technology, sociologists have developed three broad and complementary perspectives. The first, which was launched by Robert Merton and his followers, emphasized how science and society do interact, but at some distance, so to speak. Science is a social institution, with its own norms, organizations, rules of conduct and ethos. Modern science has tried hard to distance itself from other social institutions, particularly political and religious. However, its knowledge base has remained alien to sociology; sociology had, according to this approach, not much to say on the cognitive content, which is best left to scientists themselves, philosophers and historians of science. We may call this perspective, which focusses on describing the institutions of science, science and society. This perspective emphasizes the relative autonomy of science from society, and shows that science needs an institutional basis if it is to function properly. In many respects, such as inequality of rewards, baptized by Merton as the "Matthew effect," it is much like other institutions.
The second perspective may be called society in science and is about the practices of science: how science is done, how facts and theories are agreed upon, how science is also work in particular settings. It was established by innovative sociologists, many of whom came to sociology after training in the natural sciences. They were interested in studying science as a thoroughly social and cultural activity, including the shaping of its content.
The third perspective, which is even more general and has also been the domain of other disciplines such as history, is concerned with the impacts of science on society, which we may call science in society. All three perspectives are represented in the six books under review, but differ in their relative weights. Sismondo and Yearley's books are more concerned with society in science and the analysis of the more narrow field of the sociology of scientific knowledge. Erickson and David focus on broader considerations and relate science to large cultural and social trends. Alone among the authors, Erickson includes a chapter on the science of science fiction and another...
|
