| Title | Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists |
| Publication Type | Journal Article |
| Authors | Gieryn, Thomas F. |
| Journal | American Sociological Review |
| Volume | 48 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pagination | 781-795 |
| Abstract | The demarcation of science from other intellectual activities-long an analytic
problem for philosophers and sociologists-is here examined as a practical problem
for scientists. Construction of a boundary between science and varieties of
non-science is useful for scientists' pursuit of professional goals: acquisition of
intellectual authority and career opportunities; denial of these resources to
"pseudoscientists"; and protection of the autonomy of scientific research from
political interference. "Boundary-work" describes an ideological style found in
scientists' attempts to create a public image for science by contrasting it favorably to
non-scientific intellectual or technical activities. Alternative sets of characteristics
available for ideological attribution to science reflect ambivalences or strains within
the institution: science can be made to look empirical or theoretical, pure or applied.
However, selection of one or another description depends on which characteristics
best achieve the demarcation in a way that justifies scientists' claims to authority or
resources. Thus, "science" is no single thing: its boundaries are drawn and redrawn
inflexible, historically changing and sometimes ambiguous ways. |
| Notes | 'Notes for Memo 2\n\nBoundaries between what is science and what is not is important for policy and laws. This article discusses what that boundary is, and where it should be.\nThis is a social theory article that I will use for my thesis.\nI found this article during a literature search. It is a peer-reviewed article.\n\n - mcdevl2'
|
