Abstract
This article is the second of two that examine some of the claims of contemporary sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK) and the bearing of these claims upon the rationale and practice of science teaching. In the present article the celebrated work Laboratory Life of Latour and Woolgar is critically examined. Its radical, iconoclastic view of science is shown to be not merely without foundation but an extravagant deconstructionist nihilism according to which all science is fiction and the world is said to be socially constructed by negotiation. On this view, the success of a theory is not due to its intellectual merits or explanatory plausibility but to the capacity of its proponents to “extract compliance” from others. If warranted, such views pose a revolutionary challenge to the entire Western tradition of science and the goals of science education which must be misguided and unrealizable in principle. Fortunately, there is little reason to take these views seriously, though their widespread popularity is cause for concern among science educators.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Allen, W.: 1980, Side Effects, Random House, New York.
Ashmore, M.: 1989, The Reflexive Thesis: Wrighting Sociology of Scientific Knowledge, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Ashmore, M.: 1993, ‘The Theatre of the Blind: Starring a Promethean Prankster, a Phoney Phenomenon, a Prism, a Pocket and a Piece of Wood’, Social Studies of Science, 23, 67–106.
Bloor, D.: 1976, Knowledge and Social Imagery, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
Collins, H. M. and S. Yearley: 1992, ‘Journey into Space’ in A. Pickering (ed.), Science as Practice and Culture, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 369–389.
Duhem, P.: 1906/1962, The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory, Athenaeum, New York.
Feyerabend, P. K.: 1975a Against Method, New Left Books, London.
Feyerabend, P. K.: 1975b ‘How to Defend Society Against Science’, Radical Philosophy, 11, 3–8.
Fodor, J.: 1986, ‘Banish disContent’, in Jeremy Butterfield ed., Language, Mind and Logic, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1–23.
Freeman, D.: 1983, Margaret Mead and Samoa: The Making and Unmaking of an Anthropological Myth, Australian National University Press, Canberra.
Gough, N.: ‘Laboratories in Schools: Material Places, Mythic Spaces’, The Australian Science Teachers Journal, 39, 29–33.
Hacking, I.: 1988, ‘The Participant Irrealist at Large in the Laboratory’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 39, 277–294.
Hofstadter, D.: 1979, Gödel, Escher & Bach, Basic Books, New York.
Jarvie, I. C.: 1986, ‘On Theories of Fieldwork and the Scientific Character of Social Anthropology’ in his Thinking About Society: Theory and Practice, D. Reidel/Kluwer, Dordrecht, 107–126.
Latour, B.: 1983, ‘Give Me a Laboratory and I Will Raise the World’, in Knorr-Cetina, K.D. and M. Mulkay, (eds.), Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study of Science, Sage, New York.
Latour, B.: 1988, ‘The Politics of Explanation: An Alternative’, in Woolgar, S. (ed.), Knowledge and Reflexivity, Sage, London, 155–176.
Latour, B. and S. Woolgar: 1979, Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Sage, London.
Latour, B. and S. Woolgar: 1986, Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. 2nd Edition. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Laudan, L.: 1990, Science and Relativism, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Lehman, D.: 1991, Signs of the TImes: Deconstruction and the Fall of Paul de Man, Simon & Schuster, New York.
Merton, R. K.: 1973. ‘The Perspective of Insiders and Outsiders’ in his The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Norris, C.: 1992, Uncritical Theory: Postmodernism, Intellectuals and the Gulf War, Lawrence & Wishart, London.
Pickering, A. (ed.): 1992, Science as Practice and Culture. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Pinch T. J.: 1993, ‘Generations of SSK’, Social Studies of Science, 23, 363–73.
Pinch T. J. and H. M. Collins: 1984, ‘Private Science and Public Knowledge: The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of the Paranormal and its Use of the Literature’, Social Studies of Science, 14, 521–46.
Plotnick, F.: 1980, ‘Fabrizio's: Criticism and Response’, in W. Allen, Side Effects, Random House, New York, 123–129.
Popper, K. R.: 1966, The Open Society and Its Enemies, Volume 2, Hegel and Marx, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
Quine, W. V.: 1960, Word and Object, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Sartre, J.: 1976, Critique of Dialectical Reason, NLB, London.
Stove, D.: 1991, The Plato Cult and Other Philosophical Follies, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Woolgar, S.: 1988, Science: The Very Idea, Ellis Horwood, Sussex.
Woolgar, S. (ed.): 1988, Knowledge and Reflexivity, Sage, London.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Slezak, P. Sociology of scientific knowledge and science education part 2: Laboratory life under the microscope. Sci Educ 3, 329–355 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00488451
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00488451