科学知识是社会构建的吗?对实验室生活的贝叶斯解释。

Frontiers in research metrics and analytics Pub Date : 2023-08-02 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frma.2023.1214512
Henry Small
{"title":"科学知识是社会构建的吗?对实验室生活的贝叶斯解释。","authors":"Henry Small","doi":"10.3389/frma.2023.1214512","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the book <i>Laboratory Life</i> Latour and Woolgar present an account of how scientific \"facts\" are formed through a process of microsocial interactions among individuals and \"inscription devices\" in the lab initially described as social construction. The process moves through a series of steps during which the details and nature of the object become more and more certain until all qualifications are dropped, and the \"fact\" emerges as secure scientific knowledge. An alternative to this account is described based on a Bayesian probabilistic framework which arrives at the same end point. The motive force for the constructivist approach appears to involve social processes of convincing colleagues while the Bayesian approach relies on the consistency of theory and evidence as judged by the participants. The role of social processes is discussed in Bayesian terms, the acquisition and asymmetry of information, and its analogy to puzzle solving. Some parallels between the Bayesian and constructivist accounts are noted especially in relation to information theory.</p>","PeriodicalId":73104,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10433636/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is scientific knowledge socially constructed? A Bayesian account of <i>Laboratory Life</i>.\",\"authors\":\"Henry Small\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frma.2023.1214512\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the book <i>Laboratory Life</i> Latour and Woolgar present an account of how scientific \\\"facts\\\" are formed through a process of microsocial interactions among individuals and \\\"inscription devices\\\" in the lab initially described as social construction. The process moves through a series of steps during which the details and nature of the object become more and more certain until all qualifications are dropped, and the \\\"fact\\\" emerges as secure scientific knowledge. An alternative to this account is described based on a Bayesian probabilistic framework which arrives at the same end point. The motive force for the constructivist approach appears to involve social processes of convincing colleagues while the Bayesian approach relies on the consistency of theory and evidence as judged by the participants. The role of social processes is discussed in Bayesian terms, the acquisition and asymmetry of information, and its analogy to puzzle solving. Some parallels between the Bayesian and constructivist accounts are noted especially in relation to information theory.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73104,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10433636/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2023.1214512\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2023.1214512","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在《实验室生活》(Laboratory Life)一书中,拉图尔和伍尔加阐述了科学 "事实 "是如何通过实验室中个人与 "铭刻设备 "之间的微观社会互动过程形成的,这一过程最初被描述为社会建构。在这一过程中,对象的细节和性质变得越来越确定,直到所有限定条件都被取消,"事实 "作为可靠的科学知识出现。贝叶斯概率论框架是这一解释的替代方案,其终点与此相同。建构主义方法的动力似乎涉及说服同事的社会过程,而贝叶斯方法则依赖于参与者对理论和证据一致性的判断。从贝叶斯的角度讨论了社会过程的作用、信息的获取和不对称及其与解谜的类比。我们注意到贝叶斯方法和建构主义方法之间的一些相似之处,特别是在信息理论方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Is scientific knowledge socially constructed? A Bayesian account of Laboratory Life.

In the book Laboratory Life Latour and Woolgar present an account of how scientific "facts" are formed through a process of microsocial interactions among individuals and "inscription devices" in the lab initially described as social construction. The process moves through a series of steps during which the details and nature of the object become more and more certain until all qualifications are dropped, and the "fact" emerges as secure scientific knowledge. An alternative to this account is described based on a Bayesian probabilistic framework which arrives at the same end point. The motive force for the constructivist approach appears to involve social processes of convincing colleagues while the Bayesian approach relies on the consistency of theory and evidence as judged by the participants. The role of social processes is discussed in Bayesian terms, the acquisition and asymmetry of information, and its analogy to puzzle solving. Some parallels between the Bayesian and constructivist accounts are noted especially in relation to information theory.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Navigating algorithm bias in AI: ensuring fairness and trust in Africa. The ethics of knowledge sharing: a feminist examination of intellectual property rights and open-source materials in gender transformative methodologies. Complexity and phase transitions in citation networks: insights from artificial intelligence research. Designing measures of complex collaborations with participatory, evidence-centered design. Patent data-driven analysis of literature associations with changing innovation trends.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1