“Cross-Cultural Conceits: Science in China and the West.” (original) (raw)
Related papers
In this paper an anthropological perspective on the emergence of science is developed. The cultural dimension of knowledge conceptions is theorized by looking at metatheories of learning. Central to this essay is a radical reformulation of the Zilsel thesis in terms of the yoking of two different theories of learning -the one of the artisans with the one of the intellectuals. The cultural roots of science are Christian because the indigenous European knowledge conception is loaded with assumptions specific to Christianity.
The Two Cultures" and the Historical Perspective on Science as a Culture
Forum on Public Policy a Journal of the Oxford Round Table, 2007
In the Rede lecture of 1959, C.P.Snow speaks in terms of two cultures, one of science, the other of literary intellectuals. Snow's discussion presupposes that science represents a culture of its own, independent of and superior to the arts and humanities, and unified within itself. At our present distance from this claim, Snow's point of view can be seen as a product of the philosophical orientation to science as an embodiment of universal truths about nature as well as cold war pressures on the West to improve educational standards in science. As the terms in which science is discussed have changed in the last nearly half-century, so has our response to the terms of Snow's "Two Cultures"altered with time. The fields of history and sociology of science have shown the degree to which science is both fully enmeshed in society and conditioned by history, making it more difficult to support the idea of a separate "culture" of science immune from the effects of society and history. That the viability of a culture of science as an independent entity is contested in contemporary academic circles furthermore affects the mode in which students of science and the humanities are inculcated. This paper discusses the historical perspective on science as a culture and considers the impact of changing views about the nature, aims, and methods of science on the teaching of science and its history.
Thinking Like a Man? The Cultures of Science
Women: A Cultural Review, 2003
Reading too much to see, writing too much to think', licensed intellectuals today are usually too cut off from wider audiences even to deserve the Wildean derision they once received. Yet the public domain has its wellknown hazards. Academics rarely set its agenda, even when we do manage to address an audience beyond the barely-read journals stringent funding bodies force us into. Accordingly, I did not set the agenda when I agreed to present a session in Birkbeck's public lecture series: Close Encounters: Culture Meets Science. An odd situation, when I have tried to be the sternest critic of the dualism such 'encounter' excites-however intimate. The battle lines are familiar in Britian's upmarket media: while wellknown psychiatrist Raj Persuad can be heard arguing that science needs art, the equally recognizable biologist Lewis Wolpert insists that never the twain shall meet. Beyond binary conflicts, however, not only does culture include science but, more significantly, science includes culture. To say this is to say, one might think, very little; yet it remains profoundly contentious-the ground for endless battles. It is to suggest, merely, that at any time we come to the sphere of science with all our everyday pre-conceptions in place. At least in the world of human and social affairs, the nature of the empirical research which gets done and, in particular, the way it is broadcast and popularised, whether by scientists or their promoters, always reflects the assumptions and goals of the culture around it, or certain pockets of it. And in the dazzling techno-world we now occupy the extraordinary degree of information available to us itself triggers ubiquitous debates over science, which is altogether a good thing if-and only if-it does not lead to instant polarizations. Culture includes science; science includes culture; yet it is certain that, throughout modern times, it is a mutual stand-off between what is seen as the two separate traditions which has encouraged the most intensely sectarian forms of professional rivalry, animosity and conflict, both within and without the academy. The eternal return of wars supposedly between culture and science or, put more judiciously, within the "two cultures", take us back at least to where most date the birth of Reason, to the 1780s. This was when the philosopher Immanuel Kant (troubled by David Hume's empiricism) awakened from his 'dogmatic
The focus on comparison of science in China and the West has resulted in quite a lot of research in the West, which we could try to synthesize. Quite a lot of work has been done on the comparison of Chinese and Western science, a reflection on these works could offer us an insight in the way which science in different civilizations are conceptualized and compared, and this is what we are going to conduct in this work. Based on the examination of those Western scholars’ works, I try to see how the differences between western and Chinese science are constructed by historians and other scholars, and what these constructions reveal about the relationship between “the West” and China. I examine the range of explanations that scholars in China and the West have offered for the disparity of development of natural science in China and the West, and their answers to the Needham question, so as to have an insight in the way which China has been regarded and portrayed by historians and other scholars. The question I focus on in this piece is as follow: What kind of presumes were taken as granted in comparative studies of history of science in different civilizations? What is the possibility, on a methodological aspect, to make comparative study of science and culture in China and the West? By justifying the presuppositions in the comparative studies of history of science, I propose to draw some provisional methodological conclusions on comparative studies. This also provides us with new perspectives to look at the Needham question. I studies the ways in which Western and Chinese writers have conceptualized Western and Chinese science and their differences. I problematize the notions of “Science” and the “West”, review the debate whether there was a form of science in ancient China, and discuss Western and Chinese responses to the Needham question (roughly, why did modern science develop in Europe but not in China?). I explain the variety of standpoints in the literature partly by the fact that writers have taken different views of science: as practical empiricism, as a mathematical-experimental knowledge system, and as a cultural phenomenon.
Introduction: Perspectives on Science and Culture
2018
This edited volume in the Comparative Cultural Studies Series explores the intersection between scientific understanding and cultural representation from an interdisciplinary perspective. The contributions in this volume analyze popular representations of science and scientific discourse from the perspectives of rhetorical criticism, comparative cultural studies, narratology, educational studies, discourse analysis, the cognitive sciences, and naturalized and evolutionary epistemology. As such, the volume fits within the theoretical and methodological framework of comparative cultural studies as a contextual approach to the study of culture from an interdisciplinary perspective. The main objective of this volume is to explore how particular cognitive predispositions and cultural representations both shape and distort the public debate about scientific controversies, the teaching and learning of science, and the development of science itself. Theoretically, this volume will integrate, on the one hand, C. P. Snow's concept of the two cultures (science versus the humanities) and Jerome Bruner's confrontation between narrative and logico-scientific modes of thinking and, on the other hand, cognitive and epistemological approaches to human cognition and culture, including science. From this unique conciliatory framework, the volume explores how narratives and other cultural representations transform complex scientific issues into digestible bits of information based on particular selections and deflections. Some of the contributions analyze how scientific representations and metaphors of science take shape in pictures, cartoons, and television broadcasts, but also in novels and popular magazines. Others specifically focus on the implications of these representations and (mis)understandings for science education, both in
The Socio-Cultural Dimensions of Science
1993
Logical positivism and empiricism embody the scientific spirit that puts science autonomous from culture and society. This can be questioned from a cultural perspective, which accommodates the various contexts of human knowledge. In this perspective, science as a system of human knowledge is deeply rooted and colored by the socio-cultural context. Key Words: Knowledge Science Culture Religion Tradition Metaphysics Society Cultural epistemology Relativism Reflexivity. Science as a Socio-cultural Problem cience is often discussed in a strict separation from culture and Ssoci ety. Logical positivism and empiricism have put the scientific world as an autonomous domain in a way that it may become sterilized from any socio-cultural influence. This seems to have been achieved through an elimination of the 'metaphysical' dimensions of science. This brings serious consequences. Firstly, this tendency has created a hegemony of science; 2 science determines terms of reference...