Wolf Schäfer

Global civilization and local cultures: A crude look at the whole

This article distinguishes between civilization and culture in the tradition of Alfred Weber and Robert Merton. Civilization denotes the human control of nature and is used in the singular; culture indicates the social construction of meaning and is used in the plural. Civilization is also the term for the social-natural whole, and culture for the local parts of the whole. The renewed distinction between civilization and culture aims to correct the underattention in the social sciences and humanities to technoscientific developments. Furthermore, it is unsatisfactory to view contemporary history from the points of view of local cultures only. The author argues that a revised understanding of civilization is necessary to deal with the globalization of technoscience.

Agricultural Chemistry. The Origin and Structure of a Finalized Science

This case-study of agricultural chemistry illustrates a number of those interconnections between social needs, cognitive patterns in science and strategies for the institutionalization of science which are relevant to a cognitive sociology of the development of science and technology. In particular, it allows a consideration of the interaction between, (i) the existence of a social problem, (ii) the perception of this problem, (iii) the limited ability of science to offer a solution to the problem at a particular stage of development, (iv) the development of experimental techniques and models, (v) the institutionalization of a cognitive variant in science. The specific structuring of these relationships within agricultural chemistry enables it to be classified within that category of science dynamics termed by us “finalized science”.1 Finalized science occupies a place between those types of scientific activity which — at least conventionally — are regarded as the investigation of the “construction of reality”, carried out independently of any social influences, and those whose main concern is the application of scientific findings to special technical problems using the theoretical tools already at hand. In contrast, agricultural chemistry involves both the development of fundamental theories and the consideration of the social goals which prompt and shape these theories.

Towards a Social Science of Nature

The first attempt has proved a failure: the “Universal and General Reformation of the Whole Wide World” — the humble aim of the Modern Age so aptly formulated by Johann Valentin Andreae1 — did indeed take place, but in a form which has shattered all the hopes of the Early Modern Age for a union between scientific and technical progress and the universal satisfaction of human needs. Work is now in progress on the second draft. But what the late-twentieth century demands and needs is: an end to the scientific-technical construction of rational paradises, and instead the social reconstruction of the scientific-technical world; an end to attempts to exercise mastery of nature, and instead the social reform of control over science and technology; an end to the scientific revolutionizing of the world to the exclusion of “Moralls and Politicks”2 and instead the renormatization of scientific knowledge.

Finalization in perspective: Toward a revolution in the social paradigm of science

a paradigm. It is a field rich in hypotheses but poor in effective results. Philosophy of science often enough lacks empirical backing, and many case studies in history of science are not compatible with philosophy of science. As a matter of fact, when we have tried to check our theoretical assumptions against insights from history and sociology of science, we have found that, in switching to and fro between theory and empirical data, we too have tended to lose track of one or other of these aspects. Moreover, there is an additional danger. As the field of critical science studies becomes professionalized, which it inevitably will, it may become depoliticized. My presentation is aimed against the gradual levelling of both the theoretical and political claims raised by our group’s approach to science studies (cf. Bohme et al., 1978a). I will focus on the

A note on the Social Natural Science Project (SNSP): Science, politics and nature

nature. Science studies provides knowledge about scientifictechnical progress, and could therefore specifically contribute to the resolving of this issue. However, for this knowledge to become effective and useful, science studies has to overcome its sciencecentred bias and focus more on the interactions between science, politics, and nature. The aim of the Social Natural Science Project is to confront science studies with the question of science-caused er vironmental destruction. In a previous research project our point of departure was the relationship of science to its social and political en-

Summary of Contributions

The conceptual and programmatic studies of Finalization Revisited and Normative Finalization together with the essay on The Scientification of Technology elaborate our theoretical framework of critical science studies.