Hi I do wonder about the application of "objective" to this review since the reviewer, Jan Golinski, is an unabashed promoter of a constructionist view of the history of science. From his website, here is a brief description of one of his books:
"Viewing scientific knowledge as a product of human culture, Jan Golinski challenges the traditional trajectory of the history of science as steady and autonomous progress. In exploring topics such as the social identity of the scientist, the significance of places where science is practiced, and the roles played by language, instruments, and images, Making Natural Knowledge sheds new light on the relations between science and other cultural domains." So the book under review happens to provide further "evidence" (i.e., someone who agrees with Jan) for his perspective. Reading the review, I was struck by the claim that "objectivity" only emerged as a central value for scientists in the mid 19th century. Surely, it has a much older footing in science and empiricism (e.g., Bacon's idols of the mind, the use of observation to test beliefs, ...). Take care Jim James M. Clark Professor of Psychology 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax [email protected] >>> "Mike Palij" <[email protected]> 24-Nov-10 4:33:43 PM >>> On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 12:49:11 -0800, Christopher D. Green wrote: >Indeed, we should be objective, but we should also read Daston & >Galison's book about the history of the term, and how its meaning has >shifted over the decades from the mid-19th century until now (so that we >don't get too self-righteous about the matter). > http://www.amazon.com/Objectivity-Lorraine-Daston/dp/1890951781 > >(And then, we could read my article about how some of E. B. Titchener's >work is more explicable if seen through the lens of Daston & Galison's >history of objectivity, forthcoming in the December issue of the history >of science journal, /Isis/) :-) Shameless self-promoter! :-) In the meantime, for those who've given up their subscriptions to the American Scientist, here's a review of the Daston & Galison book that provides, I think, a reasonable (dare I say "objective") view as well as some of its limitations; see: http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/how-to-be-objective -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=6729 or send a blank email to leave-6729-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6749 or send a blank email to leave-6749-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
