چکیده:
In this article, the social constructivist approach in the field of philosophy and sociology of science is introduced and examined. From a philosophical perspective, social constructivism is a rival to standard philosophies of science—whether positivist or falsificationist—following the failure of these philosophies and the emergence of theses such as the theory of theory-ladenness of observations, underdetermination of theories, and the incommensurability of paradigms. Historically, social constructivism is rooted in two currents: the sociology of knowledge and the sociology of science, seeking to achieve a correct and complete understanding of science within its social context. Given the position of social constructivism, this study attempts to use sociological texts alongside philosophy of science texts to carefully examine various types of social constructivism, as well as the claims and results of each. Finally, the criticisms raised regarding social constructivism and their responses are examined to identify the strengths and weaknesses of this movement.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Reaching a specific definition of social constructionism is practically impossible; because in different contexts, different currents exist regarding this matter, such as feminism, educational theory, mathematics, sociology, and the philosophy of science.
What Paul Boghossian states is so vague and extensive that it encompasses the entire history and scope of sociology; therefore, it is better to examine what distinguishes social constructionism from other sociological and philosophical theories and schools of thought, and what makes its application justified for certain things.
This point is the fundamental difference between new social constructivism and the sociology of knowledge and science; that is, constructivists extend the influence of social factors to the content of science as well and believe that social agency determines scientific beliefs and other beliefs.
Based on the positivist conception, the content of science and its progress are presented as something completely separate from the influences of social factors and having their own firm and unchangeable logic of progress; whereas historical research such as Kuhn's and philosophical investigations such as those of Duhem, Quine, and Feyerabend show the opposite.
semantical Apart from the fact that all constructivists use the theories previously mentioned in their defense, semantical constructivism, more specifically, relies on two theories: the underdetermination of theories in light of empirical evidence and the theory of the lack of decisive empirical content in propositions, which Kripke has proposed; meaning, based on Kripke's theory, they claim that since experience cannot decisively determine the content of a proposition, its definitive determination will depend on social factors.
In general, eight basic criticisms can be distinguished: relativism, infinite regress, pure social determinism, conflation between reality and belief in reality, having unacceptable consequences, failure to explain the success of theories, especially (1).
(
, 
, 
)
