爱丁堡学派解构默顿科学社会学的三元向度

Three Topics of Edinburgh School’s Deconstruction of the Sociology of Science of Merton

20世纪70年代伊始,默顿科学社会学受到了来自各方的批判,其中,爱丁堡学派可谓是最激进的代表。爱丁堡学派主要从三个方面对默顿科学社会学进行了全面的解构:其一,极力批判默顿科学社会学对科学知识进行"黑箱化"处理,倡导对科学知识进行社会学分析;其二,质疑默顿科学规范理论,不仅直接批评了默顿科学规范的独特性和有效性,还强调与默顿科学规范相悖的科学中的利益和权威等因素;其三,对同行承认作了本质上不同于默顿的解读。与默顿迥异,爱丁堡学派认为,同行承认只是科学奖励制度的一个中介环节,激励科学家从事科学活动的最终因素是包含利益因素的科学家个人的特定要求和需要得到满足。

From the 1970s, sociology of scientific knowledge was criticized from different parties and Edinburgh School wasthe most jacobinical one. The Edinburgh School deconstructed sociology of science of Merton from three directions mainly, that is,first, they criticized that Merton had studied scientific knowledge in the black box process and advocated analysis of scientificknowledge from the sociological perspective; second, they not only criticized the specificity and effectiveness of scientific norms,but also stressed the authority and interests in science which are contrary to Merton’s scientific norms; third, they had interpretationof peer recognition essentially different from Merton’s. The Edinburgh School thought peer recognition was only an intermediate linkof science award system and the ultimate incentive is that specific requirements and needs of scientists are met.