Regimes of science production and diffusion: towards a transverse organization of knowledge
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-31662012000500003Palavras-chave:
Regimes of science and technology production and diffusion, Disciplinary regime, Utilitarian regime, Transitory regime, Research-technology regime, Transversality, Pragmatic universalityResumo
This article is a contribution to the critical sociology of science perspective introduced and developed by Pierre Bourdieu. The paper proposes a transversalist theory of science and technology production and diffusion. It is here argued that science and technology are comprised of multiple regimes where each regime is historically grounded, possesses its own division of labour, modes of cognitive and artifact production and has specific audiences. The major regimes include the disciplinary regime, utilitarian regime, transitory regime and research-technology regime. Though each regime is autonomous, they are simultaneously closely interlaced. In science and technology, autonomy is not antithetical to interdependence and reciprocity. This study demonstrates for the four specified regimes of production and diffusion that differentiation is not contrary to interaction. In science, differentiation and interaction comprise two sides of the same coin. All regimes exhibit a measure of transversality.
Downloads
Referências
Abbott, A. Things of boundaries. Social Research, 62, p. 857-82, 1995.
Abbott, A. Chaos of disciplines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004.
Abir-Am, P. From multidisciplinary collaborations to trans-national objectivity: international space as constitutive of molecular biology, 1930-1970. In: Crawford, E.; Shinn, T. & Sörlin, S. (Ed.). Denationalizing science: the contexts of international scientific practice. Dortrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993. p. 153-86.
Auger, J. F. Le régime de recherche utilitaire du professeur-consultant de chimie industrielle au cours de la Seconde Révolution Industrielle. Annals of Science, 61, 3, p. 351-74, 2004.
Auger, J. F. La formation des ingénieurs électriciens au Canada avant la Première Guerre Mondiale. In: Birck, F. & Grelon, A. (Ed.). Un siècle de formation d’ingénieurs électriciens: ancrage local et dynamique européenne, l’exemple de Nancy. Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, 2006. p. 421-46.
Bechtel, W. Integrating sciences by creating new disciplines: the case of cell biology. Biology and Philosophy, 8, 3, p. 277-99, 1993.
Bellacasa, M. P. & Puig, M. Matters of care in technoscience: assembling neglected things. Social Studies of Science, 41, 1, p. 85-106, 2011.
Ben David, J. Roles and innovations in medicine. American Journal of Sociology, 45, p. 557-68, 1960.
Bensaude-Vincent, B. The construction of a discipline: materials science in the U.S.A. Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences, 31, 2, p. 223-48, 2001.
Bensaude-Vincent, B. Les vertiges de la technoscience. Paris: La Découverte, 2009.
Birck, F. & Grelon, A. (Ed.). Un siècle de formation d’ingénieurs électriciens: ancrage local et dynamique européenne, l’exemple de Nancy. Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, 2006.
Bourdieu, P. Le champ scientifique et les conditions sociales du progrès de la raison. Sociologie et Sociétés, 7, 1, p. 91-117, 1975.
Bourdieu, P. Science de la science et réflexivité. Paris: Raisons d’agir, 2001.
Brown, N. & Brian, W. Contested futures: a sociology of prospective techno-science. Paris: Lavoisier Librairie, 2000.
Cahan, D. An institute for an empire: the Pysikalisch-Technische Reichsanstalt, 1871-1918. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989.
Carrier, M. & Nordmann, A. (Ed.). Science in the context of application: methodological change, conceptual transformation, cultural reorientation. Dordrecht: Springer, 2010.
Crawford, E.; Shinn, T. & Sörlin, S. (Ed.). Denationalizing science: the contexts of international scientific practice. Dortrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993.
Cambrosio, A.; Jacobi, D. & Keating, P. Arguing with images. Pauling’s theory of antibody formation. In: Pauwels, L. (Ed.). Visual cultures of science: rethinking representational practices in knowledge building and science communication. Dartmouth: Dartmouth College Press, 2006. p. 153-94.
Clain, O. L’idéaltype de la technoscience. Série d’émissions sur France 5, 1995.
Crosland, M. Science under control: the French Academy of Science 1795-1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
Fox, R. & Guagnini, A. (Ed.). Education, technology and industrial performance, 1850-1939. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Galison, P. Image and logic. A material culture of microphysics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997.
Gibbons, J. H. et al. The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage, 1994.
Hacking I. Representing and intervening. Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Hayles, K. (Ed.) Nanoculture. Implications of the new technoscience. Bristol: Intellect Books, 2004.
Heilbron, J. L. The rise of social science disciplines in France. Revue Européenne des Sciences Sociales, 42, 129, p. 145-57, 2004.
Hoddeson, L. et al. Out of the crystal maze: chapters from the history of solid state physics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.
Idhe, D. & Sellinger, E. (Ed.). Chasing technoscience. Cambridge: India University Press, 2003.
Joerges, B. & Shinn, T. Instrumentation between science, state and industry. Dortrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.
Johnson, A. The shape of molecules to come. In: Lenhard, J. et al. (Ed.). Simulation, pragmatic construction of reality. Dortrecht: Springer, 2006. p. 25-40.
Kay, L. E. The molecular vision of life: Caltech, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the rise of the new biology. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
Kay, L. E. Who wrote the book of life? A history of the genetic code. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2000.
König, W. Technical education and industrial performance in Germany: a triumph of heterogeneity. In: Fox, R. & Guagnini, A. (Ed.). Education, technology and industrial performance, 1850-1939. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. p. 65-88.
Lamont, M. et al. Beyond blind faith: overcoming the obstacles to interdisciplinary evaluation. Research Evaluation, 15, 1, p. 43–55, 2006.
Lemaine, G. et al. Perspectives on the emergence of scientific disciplines. Mouton: The Hague, 1976.
Lenhard, J. et al. (Ed.). Simulation, pragmatic construction of reality. Dortrecht: Springer, 2006.
Loewenhertz, L. Bericht über die Wissenschaftlichen Instrumente auf der Berliner Gewerbeausstellung 187. Berlin: Springer, 1880.
Marcovich, A. & Shinn, T. Cognitive, instrumental and institutional origins of nanoscale research: the place of biology. In: Carrier, M. & Nordmann, A. (Ed.). Science in the context of application: methodological change, conceptual transformation, cultural reorientation. Dordrecht: Springer, 2010. p. 221-45.
Marcovich, A. & Shinn, T. Where is disciplinarity going? Meeting on the borderland. Social Science Information, 50, 3, 4, p. 1-25, 2011a.
Marcovich, A. & Shinn, T. Instrument research, tools and the knowledge enterprise, 1999-2009. Birth and development of dip-pen nanolithography. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 36, 6, p. 866-96, 2011b.
Marcovich, A. & Shinn, T. Respiration and cognitive synergy circulation in and between scientific research spheres. Minerva. Forthcoming.
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2012 Scientiae Studia
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
A revista detém os direitos autorais de todos os textos nela publicados. Os autores estão autorizados a republicar seus textos mediante menção da publicação anterior na revista. A revista adota a Licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.
