Philosophy of the Social Sciences 24 (3):336-361 (1994)

Authors
Peter Slezak
University of New South Wales
Abstract
The recent republication of David Bloor's Knowledge and Social Imagery in a second edition provides an occasion to reappraise the celebrated work which launched the so-called Strong Programme in the sociology of scientific knowledge. This work embodies the general outlook and foundational principles in a way that is still characteristic of its descendents. Above all, the recent republication of Bloor's original book is evidence of the continuing interest and importance of the work, but it also provides the clearest evidence of the shortcomings of the enterprise. The arguments presented in the bulk of the book have received relatively little attention by comparison with the principal tenets enunciated in the first few pages. Accordingly, a detailed examination is made of these original arguments which were so influential in establishing the sociology of scientific knowledge. A close analysis reveals their seemingly unnoticed vacuity, as well as a vast discrepancy between the radical tenets of the Strong Programme and the theses that are actually defended in the body of Bloor's text. In this sense, this article serves to complement and reinforce Mario Bunge's recent masterful survey of the field, which he describes as "a grotesque cartoon of scientific research."
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1177/004839319402400304
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,291
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Indeterminism in Quantum Physics and in Classical Physics.Karl R. Popper - 1950 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 1 (2):117-133.
II.1 The Pseudo-Science of Science?Larry Laudan - 1981 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 11 (2):173-198.
Indeterminism in Quantum Physics and in Classical Physics. Part I.Karl R. Popper - 1950 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 1 (2):117-133.
Indeterminism in Quantum Physics and in Classical Physics: Part II.Karl R. Popper - 1950 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 1 (3):173-195.
A Critical Examination of the New Sociology of Science Part 1.Mario Bunge - 1991 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 21 (4):524.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

A Second Look at David Bloor’s Knowledge and Social Imagery.Peter Slezak - 1994 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 24 (3):336-361.
Relativism and the Sociology of Mathematics: Remarks on Bloor, Flew, and Frege.Timm Triplett - 1986 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 29 (1-4):439-450.
Knowledge and Social Imagery.David Bloor - 1976 - University of Chicago Press.
Alternative Mathematics and the Strong Programme: Reply to Triplett.Richard C. Jennings - 1988 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 31 (1):93 – 101.
The Social Construction of Social Constructionism.Peter Slezak - 1994 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 37 (2):139 – 157.
Idealism and the Sociology of Knowledge.David Bloor - 1996 - Social Studies of Science 26 (4):839-856.
Wittgenstein: A Social Theory of Knowledge.David Bloor - 1983 - Columbia University Press.
Classification and the Sociology of Knowledge.David Bloor - 2005 - In Nico Stehr & Reiner Grundmann (eds.), Knowledge: Critical Concepts. Routledge. pp. 5--139.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2014-04-03

Total views
2 ( #1,417,359 of 2,456,045 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,366 of 2,456,045 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

My notes