Leave a comment

savestheworld May 5 2010, 20:49:30 UTC
science has a lot of capitalist ends. That's why it's funded unlike... equality.

Reply

punkymunky21 May 5 2010, 20:57:39 UTC
Hey, what happened to your uncritical approach to science?! ;)

Reply

savestheworld May 5 2010, 21:01:30 UTC
I'm talking about science, the industry, not science the theoretical practice!

Reply

punkymunky21 May 5 2010, 21:13:32 UTC
Oh, come on, as if you can separate the two. The discursive totality in which something exists is a part of its very existence. Science itself, even the theoretical practice, would be different under different economic, political, social, and other conditions.

Reply

savestheworld May 5 2010, 21:37:55 UTC
I disagree. If it's good science, it wouldn't be. Also, the scientific research is different in industry vs. in academia. The methods aren't different, but the intentions are (hence the choices of things to study).

Reply

punkymunky21 May 5 2010, 22:29:44 UTC
If it's good science, it wouldn't be.

Science has always been influenced by it's culture. Have you ever read "Making Sex" by Latour? It's the history of how the sexual binary came into existence. In the past, it was believed that women were not only simply inferior men, but that there could be spontaneous shifts from male to female or from female to male. What we consider female reproductive organs were thought to be internal male reproductive organs. If you look at the science from that time what you see are biological representations of just that--the ovaries are drawn to look like testicles, the entirety of the female reproductive system really looked like an internal penis and testicles.

Why am I describing this? Because they weren't doing bad science, they were doing good science in the culture in which they existed. But the culture always influences the outcome.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up