Inquiry 23 (4):377 – 395 (1980)
Some sociological theories yield self-subverting or 'dangerous' knowledge. The functionalist theory of social deviance provides a case in point. The theory, first formulated by Durkheim, maintains that ostensibly anti-social deviants perform a number of socially indispensable functions. But what would happen if everyone knew this? They would cease to regard deviants as malefactors and would indeed come to esteem them as public benefactors. In that case, however, deviants could no longer perform their proper function. If they are to play the part assigned to them by the theory, most people must remain unaware of their 'true' role in the drama of social life. This gives rise to the paradox of dangerous knowledge: The theory can be true only if its truths are not widely known; widespread ignorance is the precondition of its truth. But then, if its truths must not be publicly known, the theory is a piece of esoterica, not of science. I conclude by considering, and rejecting, several possible solutions to the 'dangerous knowledge' paradox.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Social Theory and Social Structure.Robert K. Merton - 1961 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 11 (44):345-346.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Knowledge is a Dangerous Thing: Authority Relations, Ideological Conservatism, and Creativity in Confucian-Heritage Cultures.H. O. Fai & H. O. Hung - 2008 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 38 (1):67–86.
Truth Hurts: The Sociobiology Debate, Moral Reading and the Idea of 'Dangerous Knowledge'.Petteri Pietikäinen - 2004 - Social Epistemology 18 (2-3):165-179.
Added to index2009-03-05
Total downloads19 ( #257,137 of 2,163,724 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #348,043 of 2,163,724 )
How can I increase my downloads?