Titlebook: Determinants and Controls of Scientific Development; Karin D. Knorr,Hermann Strasser,Hans Georg Zilian Book 1975 D. Reidel Publishing Comp

外科医生

Encapsulate

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-6259-2n of changes in modern science. It also discusses the processes that allow aggregated, small changes to be perceived by most scientists as a single block of changes — a revolutionary change in paradigm.

打算

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-7192-1ries of society which might be adequate to each, must develop together. The inter-linked theories I shall be proposing involve a number of new and unfamiliar ideas, both about the nature of scientific thinking and about the world to the understanding of which that thinking is directed, as well as the re-emphasis of some well known ones.

使尴尬

analogous

Book 1975to 22, 1974. The conference was initiated by a project group working on determinants and controls of social science development at the In­ stitute for Advanced Studies and Scientific Research in Vienna and or­ ganized by the editors of this volume. It was held under the auspices of the Austrian Mini

CANT

Introductionnce; to a subset of the articles there is a distinct ‘sociological’ flavour. This heterogeneity reflects some recent developments in metascience: we shall try to characterize them only very cursorily and shall point out in greater detail some problems arising out of these developments.

iodides

斜谷

Components of Scientific Activities, Their Characteristics and Institutionalisation in Specialties anary approach which encompasses all sciences is inadequate and future work must be based on the comparative analysis of developments in different sciences at different times (cf., e.g., Elias, 1974; Martins, 1972; Nowotny, 1973; Weingart, 1974; Whitley, 1974). The second point, linked to the first,

Hectic

On The Possibility of Objectivity and Moral Determinants in Scientific Changethat most sociologists have accepted, a sociology of anything, including science is biassed in favor of determinism and reductionism.. Because of confusions about the nature of science — and the frequent explicit rejection of the very idea of ‘the nature of science’ — a sociology of science has prob

钉牢