Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 13:52:04 NZST
Subject: PKF: When Harry Met Sandra


I was reading an article yesterday in Science as Culture Vol 7(1) by
Mark Elam and Oskar Juhlin where they talked about the damage that has
been done to Science Studies as a result of what they term the
"Science Wars". In that article they argue that Science Studies needs
to reconstruct its public image in the light of the fallout from the
Science Wars, to in there words "... acknowledge and confront [the]
many internal differences, and do so before a larger public." To this
end they stage an engagement between two different Science Studies
theorists, Harry Collins and Sandra Harding (from where comes the
article title "When Harry met Sandra"). Harry represents the Sociology
of Scientific Knowledge (SSK) school and Sandra the Standpoint Theory
school. The aim of the engagement then is to "...explore internal
differences productively" while avioding "civil war".

The engagement goes as follows

SSK and Standpoint theory (ST) both desire to make priviledged
knowledge claims ie tell true stories about science. However SSK
desires only to "remove the mantle of fallibility from science" while
ST wants to create new sciences by acknowleding marginal voices in
knowledge communities. Thus one has a more radical agenda than the
other.

Representing SSK Harry not surprisingly rejects postmodernism as
dangerous and anti-science in fact his agenda is to ultimately
protect the old authority of science by asking us to accept scientists
as we find them ie as experts but not infallible and to limit
sociological intervention into science as scientists know best how to
do science. Sandra on the other hand embraces the "...culturally
embedded or situated character of all knowledge claims" which are in
themselves none the less objective truths, though they are never value
neutral.

Sandra says this creates a new and higher standard of objectivity
which she calls "strong objectivity", because by loosing the notion of
value netrality she decompartmentalises knowledge communities and
makes them engage with the social interests that underlie their
research.

Harry on the other hand rejects this notion of reflexivity just as he
does postmodernism, because he wants to be scientific in his study of
science. Harry believes in value neutrality and wants to defend the
compartmentalisation of knowledge. In fact he want to reinforce the
boundaries because while scientists aren't infallible they are still
the best available experts in their fields. Harry is in fact engaged
in empire building. He wants to create a whole new discipline called
Knowledge Science that is somehow above science.

Both Harry and Sandra believe scientists delude themselves about
themselves but Harry can forgive them because sciences mistakes are
just our own human failings. In fact he wrote a book which started the
whole Science Wars off. You see scientists didn't like his depiction
of them and so started to write nasty things about SSK. Harry just
hasn't learnt a lesson that ST learnt years ago, that
compartmentalisation and universalisation are untenable because there
is no standpoint outside of culture. And as a result he has brought
the whole of the filed of Science Studies into disrepute. What Harry
needs to do is embrace Sandra and present a united front to the public
because together they can make people see the truth. By themselves
they will fall.

End of Summary

The article being premised as it was you would expect a balanced
presentation of both positions however the article mainly consists of
a series of attacks on Harry's position and on SSK as a whole. Now I
am not familiar with Standpoint Theory and this was the first
time I had heard of the "Science Wars" so I would be interested to hear
what other peoples views are on both of these things. As to SSK
itself, I have read some of Harry's work and the impression of him
given in this article was not the impression I got from reading his
stuff. Anyone like to comment?


Mike Eathorne-Gould
(michael-AT-sol.otago.ac.nz)
**********************************************************************
Contributions: mailto:feyerabend-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: mailto:majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: mailto:feyerabend-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu