Book•
Science of Science and Reflexivity
01 Jan 2004-
TL;DR: Bourdieu's "Science of Science and Reflexivity" as mentioned in this paper argues that science is in danger of becoming a handmaiden to biotechnology, medicine, genetic engineering, and military research that it risks falling under the control of industrial corporations that seek to exploit it for monopolies and profit.
Abstract: Over the last four decades, the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu produced one of the most imaginative and subtle bodies of social theory of the postwar era. When he died in 2002, he was considered to be a thinker on a par with Foucault, Barthes, and Lacan a public intellectual as influential to his generation as Sartre was to his. "Science of Science and Reflexivity" will be welcomed as a companion volume to Bourdieu's now seminal "An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology." In this posthumous work, Bourdieu declares that science is in danger of becoming a handmaiden to biotechnology, medicine, genetic engineering, and military research that it risks falling under the control of industrial corporations that seek to exploit it for monopolies and profit. Science thus endangered can become detrimental to mankind. The line between pure and applied science, therefore, must be subjected to intense theoretical scrutiny. Bourdieu's goals in "Science of Science and Reflexivity" are to identify the social conditions in which science develops in order to reclaim its objectivity and to rescue it from relativism and the forces that might exploit it. In the grand tradition of scientific reflections on science, Bourdieu provides a sociological analysis of the discipline as something capable of producing transhistorical truths; he presents an incisive critique of the main currents in the study of science throughout the past half century; and he offers a spirited defense of science against encroaching political and economic forces. A masterful summation of the principles underlying Bourdieu's oeuvre and a memoir of his own scientific journey, "Science of Science and Reflexivity" is a capstone to one of the most important and prodigious careers in the field of sociology."
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this article , a meta-ethnographic review synthesizing findings from 37 qualitative studies showed that there was a typology of different functions associated with habitus (academic socialization, motivating learning, facilitating content learning, developing learners' self-identity and aspirations).
Abstract: Contextualized in the debate on the (mis)use of habitus in educational research, the present study addresses two research questions: (a) What are the different functions that habitus (i.e., the dispositions underpinning cultural capital that are accumulated through socialization and that guide individuals' daily practices) serves in students' educational experiences? and (b) What characterizes the pattern of continuity or discontinuity for habitus across different contexts? Results of the meta-ethnographic review synthesizing findings from 37 qualitative studies show that there was a typology of different functions associated with habitus (academic socialization, motivating learning, facilitating content learning, developing learners' self-identity and aspirations). These functions transcended cognitive, affective, and social dimensions in students' present and future learning. However, habitus could also serve as a coping or risk-mitigation mechanism. Furthermore, results show that habitus could be continuous or discontinuous across fields (student, familial, institutional) and sub-fields (educational levels, types of learning, subjects, programs, learners). These results suggest that the prolific use of habitus in research should not be simply dismissed as conceptual infidelity; rather, it enables researchers to clarify how habitus serves different functions in educational experiences of students varying in their learning needs at different stages of their learning and in different contexts. The study contributes to the development of a conceptual framework for habitus that can inform future research. Practical implications for improving disadvantaged students' learning are discussed.The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11218-022-09724-4.
1 citations
04 Feb 2015
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors focus on the social dimensions of the issues addressed in this working group, social being considered at different levels: interactions, culture, and institutions, focusing on the following questions: what is a theoretical framework? Why are theories so numerous in mathematics education? Is it necessary to reduce this multiplicity? Why or why not?
Abstract: The paper focuses on the social dimensions of the issues addressed in this working group, social being considered at different levels: interactions, culture, and institutions. It addresses the following questions: what is a theoretical framework? Why are theories so numerous in mathematics education? Is it necessary to reduce this multiplicity? Why or why not? The reflection is based on the anthropological theory of the didactic (ATD) and on Bourdieu's theory of social fields. Assuming that the latter is not necessarily well-known in the mathematics education community, and that it offers an interesting potential to enrich the debate within the networking semiosphere, I devote a substantial part of my text to give an idea about the way Bourdieu applies his theory to science.
1 citations
01 Jan 2018
TL;DR: The European Commission's Framework Programme for Research (FP) has been used at European level to promote interdisciplinarity throughout its main policy tool since 1984, the Framework Programme (FP). In as mentioned in this paper, the authors discuss the policies being applied at the European level by the European Commission to promote the interdiscipline between the social sciences and the humanities (SSH) in order to tackle societal and technological challenges.
Abstract: This chapter is about the policies being applied at European level by the European Commission to promote interdisciplinarity throughout its main policy tool since 1984, the Framework Programme (FP). In this context, interdisciplinarity is defined as the combination of knowledges between the social sciences and the humanities (SSH) and the ‘natural’ or ‘life’ sciences (also called ‘STEM’ sometimes) in order to tackle societal and technological challenges that need to be integrated in a wider social, economic, cultural and political perspective which constrain technological development. The history of the FP shows that the promotion of interdisciplinarity in FPs was based on a ‘two-legs’ approach with, on the one hand, a dedicated European research programme on the main social, economic, cultural and political challenges of Europe, and on the other hand, attempts at promoting interdisciplinarity between SSH and STEM. FP8 (2014–2020), called Horizon 2020, is a significant departure from past practices since it calls exclusively for the integration of SSH across the whole FP without a dedicated research programme on Europe’s main social, economic, cultural and political issues. The preliminary results of this new policy of interdisciplinarity are reviewed and lead to several suggestions as to how to strengthen a long-term effective EU research policy for interdisciplinarity between SSH and STEM research, while preserving the benefits of disciplinary research or of other kinds of interdisciplinarity.
1 citations