Difference between revisions of "Ginev2013"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Dimitri Ginev |Title=Ethnomethodological and hermeneutic-phenomenological perspectives on scientific practices |Tag(s)=Ethnomethodology;...") |
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) m |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Dimitri Ginev | |Author(s)=Dimitri Ginev | ||
|Title=Ethnomethodological and hermeneutic-phenomenological perspectives on scientific practices | |Title=Ethnomethodological and hermeneutic-phenomenological perspectives on scientific practices | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=Ethnomethodology; Phenomenology; Science; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Ethnomethodology; Phenomenology; Science; Hermeneutic studies of science; Scientific practices; Reflexivity; Double hermeneutics; |
|Key=Ginev2013 | |Key=Ginev2013 | ||
|Year=2013 | |Year=2013 | ||
|Journal=Human Studies | |Journal=Human Studies | ||
|Volume=36 | |Volume=36 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Number=2 |
| + | |Pages=277–305 | ||
| + | |URL=http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10746-013-9264-2 | ||
| + | |DOI=10.1007/s10746-013-9264-2 | ||
| + | |Abstract=The paper presents a comparative analysis between hermeneutics and ethnomethodology of science. A careful examination of the approaches suggested by the two programs not only demonstrates that a non-essentialist inquiry of scientific practices is possible, it also reveals how the significant methodological differences between these (post-phenomenological) programs inform divergent pictures of science’s practical rationality. The role these programs play in the debates on science’s cognitive autonomy is illuminated by spelling out the idea of the internal criticism of scientific research they advance. In contrast to the external criticism of social epistemologists, the internal one does not aim at a deconstruction of science’s cognitive autonomy. Its task is to promote the epistemic emancipation of scientific communities by stressing the reflexive dimension of scientific research. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 02:23, 23 June 2016
| Ginev2013 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Ginev2013 |
| Author(s) | Dimitri Ginev |
| Title | Ethnomethodological and hermeneutic-phenomenological perspectives on scientific practices |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Ethnomethodology, Phenomenology, Science, Hermeneutic studies of science, Scientific practices, Reflexivity, Double hermeneutics |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2013 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Human Studies |
| Volume | 36 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 277–305 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1007/s10746-013-9264-2 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The paper presents a comparative analysis between hermeneutics and ethnomethodology of science. A careful examination of the approaches suggested by the two programs not only demonstrates that a non-essentialist inquiry of scientific practices is possible, it also reveals how the significant methodological differences between these (post-phenomenological) programs inform divergent pictures of science’s practical rationality. The role these programs play in the debates on science’s cognitive autonomy is illuminated by spelling out the idea of the internal criticism of scientific research they advance. In contrast to the external criticism of social epistemologists, the internal one does not aim at a deconstruction of science’s cognitive autonomy. Its task is to promote the epistemic emancipation of scientific communities by stressing the reflexive dimension of scientific research.
Notes
