The Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Contexts and Power (Writing Science)

Galison, Peter; Stump, David J.

ISBN 10: 0804725624 / ISBN 13: 9780804725620

Published by Stanford University Press, 1996

About this Item

First edition stated 1996, first printing, stated original printing on the colophon page. Published by Stanford University Press. Thick trade softcover without DJ as issued. Condition fine inside, square tight and clean book, no foxing, not an ex-library, no tears no chips, corners not bumped but rear lower corner slightly curled, no names, no underlinings no highlights, no bent page corners, not a reminder. 8vo, 584 pages, bibliography, index.

Seller Inventory # 016371

Bibliographic Details

• Title: The Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Contexts and Power (Writing Science)
• Publisher: Stanford University Press
• Publication Date: 1996
• Language: English
• ISBN 10: 0804725624
• ISBN 13: 9780804725620
• Binding: Soft cover
• Edition: 1st Edition
• Condition: Near Fine
• Dust Jacket Condition: No Jacket

About this title

Synopsis

Is science unified or disunified? Over the last century, the question has raised the interest (and hackles) of scientists, philosophers, historians, and sociologists of science, for at stake is how science and society fit together. Recent years have seen a turn largely against the rhetoric of unity, ranging from the please of condensed matter physicists for disciplinary autonomy all the way to discussions in the humanities and social sciences that involve local history, feminism, multiculturalism, postmodernism, scientific relativism and realism, and social constructivism. Many of these varied aspects of the debate over the disunity of science are reflected in this volume, which brings together a number of scholars studying science who otherwise have had little to say to each other: feminist theorists, philosophers of science, sociologists of science.

How does the context of discover shape knowledge? What are the philosophical consequences of a disunified science? Does, for example, an antirealism, a realism, or an arealism become defensible within a picture of local scientific knowledge? What politics lies behind and follows from a picture of the world of science more like a quilt than a pyramid? Who gains and loses if representation of science has standards that vary from place to place, field to field, and practitioner to practitioner.

About the Author

Peter Galison is Mallinckrodt Professor of the History of Science and of Physics at Harvard University. He is the editor, with Bruce Hevly, of Big Science: The Growth of Large-Scale Research. David J. Stump is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the University of San Francisco.