Theory of science and history of science

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The article uses an interesting discussion between historian and philosopher of science as point of departure for a brief examination of the special task of the sociology of sciences. Both historian and philosopher proceed according to certain ritualised conventions. They take it for granted that it is possible, today as in the seventeenth century, to work out a theory of science by concentrating on one science only, on theoretical physics. They are unable to come to grips with the diversification of sciences as a theoretical problem. The growth of a single science itself is treated by them as if it were an absolutely autonomous social development. A sociological theory of sciences has to take account of the observable advance of scientific knowledge into areas of the universe that were previously unknown or inaccessible to scientific exploration. It has to take account for instance of the emergence of biological and social sciences both as a science-immanent and a science-transcendent problem. Philosophers and historians of science have constructed a seemingly impenetrable conceptual wall between immanent and transcendent developments. According to them, ‘internal’ history of a science can be treated as independent of ‘external’ history. The article indicates that this is part of a professional ideology. By claiming absolute autonomy for one's subject matter one tries to secure the absolute autonomy of one's profession. If that claim is abandoned the fashionable problem of continuities and discontinuities in the development of sciences appears in a different light. Neither discontinuity nor autonomy of a scientific development can ever be absolute. Its relative autonomy, however, can grow or diminish. That of physics, for instance, is at present noticeably greater than that of sociology. One may well ask why that is the case. That is the kind of problem which requires a sociological as distinct from a philosophical or historical investigation.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: