Reviews for The Structure And Growth Of Scientific Knowledge

The average rating for The Structure And Growth Of Scientific Knowledge based on 2 reviews is 5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2007-10-24 00:00:00 Jack Dial As a university lecturer, I take academic dishonesty very seriously. And while most instances of academic malfeasance involve plagiarism, there is, perhaps, a more egregious sort of intellectual dishonesty: the methodological ignorance of post-modern science studies. Noretta Koertge is one of those few philosophers of science who has not taken the post-modern turn. In this collection of essays from notable scientists and philosophers of science, the serious, academic fraud perpetrated by those who engage in pomo Science Studies is laid bare. Influential pomo critiques of science are scrutinized for their scientific accuracy, and shown wanting. Embryology is patriarchal? Not if you have read the scientific literature: studies on the active role of the egg outnumber studies on sperm more than 10 to 1. The scientific method is based on an elaborate rape metaphor? Only if you believe that one, out-of-context and vaguely inappropriate 300 year old quote is sufficient evidence. The contemporary mechanical sciences are inherently masculine and should be abandoned in favor of alchemy? Only if you are a complete moron. Granted, society influences science on a great many ways. For example, studies of female sexuality were hampered for centuries by sexism. But, contra noted feminists such as Sandra Harding, the failure to study the importance of the clitoris in reproduction does not imply that quantum mechanics is also sexist. Koertge shows us that contemporary proponents of Science Studies fail insofar as they lack the intellectual acumen sufficient to realize that science is not a lumbering monolithic beast intent on propagating a patriarchal society. Koertge reminds us that there is value in sociological studies of the history of inquiry. Yet, she shows us quite clearly that to misrepresent scientific claims, to fraudulently proffer an understanding of scientific theories, and to treat scientific research as yet another "text" to be decontructed, is a form of academic dishonesty far worse than any perceived sexism in 17th century physics.

Review # 2 was written on 2008-06-26 00:00:00 Craig Anaka Do you think that all ways of thinking are equally valid? That science is just one way of 'knowing the world'? Do you consider science to be just our cultures creation story? Noretta Koertge is here to explain why you are wrong. Her name is pronounced ker-chee, and she is a woman so you can't dismiss her as just another tool of the colonial patriarchy sent here to oppress american graduate students.