作为社会认识论问题的解释选择

V. Porus
{"title":"作为社会认识论问题的解释选择","authors":"V. Porus","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2251111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social epistemology is a set of attempts to assign a philosophical meaning to sociological studies of cognitive processes within their social context. These attempts are being made through competition of philosophical interpretations. The choice of interpretation is governed by the desire to bring value orientations of science in line with the challenges from a changing cultural-historical environment. Robert Merton’s “normative ethos of scientists” is reviewed here as an illustration to this thesis","PeriodicalId":369373,"journal":{"name":"Epistemology eJournal","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Choice of Interpretation as a Problem of Social Epistemology\",\"authors\":\"V. Porus\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2251111\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Social epistemology is a set of attempts to assign a philosophical meaning to sociological studies of cognitive processes within their social context. These attempts are being made through competition of philosophical interpretations. The choice of interpretation is governed by the desire to bring value orientations of science in line with the challenges from a changing cultural-historical environment. Robert Merton’s “normative ethos of scientists” is reviewed here as an illustration to this thesis\",\"PeriodicalId\":369373,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epistemology eJournal\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epistemology eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2251111\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epistemology eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2251111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

社会认识论是一套试图赋予认知过程在其社会背景下的社会学研究以哲学意义的尝试。这些尝试是通过哲学解释的竞争来实现的。解释的选择是由科学的价值取向与不断变化的文化历史环境的挑战相一致的愿望所支配的。罗伯特·默顿(Robert Merton)的“科学家的规范精神”在此作为本论文的例证进行回顾
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Choice of Interpretation as a Problem of Social Epistemology
Social epistemology is a set of attempts to assign a philosophical meaning to sociological studies of cognitive processes within their social context. These attempts are being made through competition of philosophical interpretations. The choice of interpretation is governed by the desire to bring value orientations of science in line with the challenges from a changing cultural-historical environment. Robert Merton’s “normative ethos of scientists” is reviewed here as an illustration to this thesis
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Problems Encountered by School Managers in Supplying School Allowances and Expense Areas Islamic Seminaries: A Brief Historical Survey Four Components of Expertise Reducing Emergence: The Case Studies in Statistic Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics After 100 Years, the Time Has Come to Acknowledge That Boole and Keynes Founded a Mathematically, Technically, and Logically Advanced Approach to Imprecise Probability
×
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