Sociology NPTEL

Lecture 1
Sociology: Anthony Giddens Part 1

Dr. Anindya Jayanta Mishra
Associate Professor of Sociology
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences
IIT Roorkee
1
 Sociology – study of human social life, groups and societies
 covers passing encounters between individuals in the street
to investigation of global social processes
 Examples of sociological analysis – Class room,
Suicide, Love Marriage, Bureaucracy, Jeans, Sport
 Love Marriage – a modern industrial construct non- existent in
most pre-industrial societies was considered a weakness and
sickness
 It has been shaped by broader social and historical influences
2
 Sociology – demonstrates the need to take a much broader
view of life
 What we regard as natural, inevitable, good or true – many

not be so
 The givens of our life are strongly influenced by historical

and social forces
 Sociological outlook – understanding how our individual lives

reflect the complexity of our social experience
3
4
Lecture 2
Sociology: Anthony Giddens Part 2
Associate Professor of Sociology
IIT Roorkee
1
 A sociologist is someone – who is able to break free from the
immediacy of personal circumstances and put things in a
wider context
 Sociological Imagination – requires us to “ think ourselves
away from the familiar routines of our daily lives in order to
look at them anew” C Wright Mills
 Sociological Imagination- It’s an interplay of Biography and
History
 Biography – Individual Circumstance, Personal Experiences
 History – Broader Social, Economic, Political, Economic,
Religious context
 Private Trouble Versus Public Issue
2
 Sociological imagination – allows us to see that many events
that seem to concern only the individual actually reflect larger
issues
 Example – Divorce, Unemployment (both personal & public

concern)
 Example: Drinking coffee
1. Symbolic value – act of drinking – a ritual – individual & group
interaction more important
2. Use as drug – not considered a drug in most societies but is

considered so in some societies and banned
3
3. Social and economic relationship – An individual who drinks
coffee is caught up in complex set of socio eco rel. stretching
across the world
 Production, distribution, transportation require continuous
transaction between people 1000 miles from consumer
 Many aspects of our lives now affected by broader
worldwide social influences
4. Past socio-economic development – act of drinking coffee
presumes past socio economic development
 Like banana, tea, white sugar it is a new entrant to western
& Indian diet
 After 1800 – coffee has a colonial past
4
5. Coffee reflects globalisation, international trade, human rights
and environmental destruction – coffee globalised and
politicised
 Individuals may choose decaffeinated coffee or organic
coffee or fairly traded coffee or reject coffee from countries
with human rights violation – corporate coffee Vs
independent coffee houses
 Globalisation heightens our awareness of issues happening
across the world
5
Our activities both structure – give shape to – the soc world
we live in & at the same time are structured by that soc
world
Soc structure – soc context of our lives do not consist just of
random collection of events & actions – its structured,
patterned – regularities in the way we behave and in rel. we
have with one another
Soc structure – being reconstructed at every moment by the
very building block that compose it – human beings like you
and me
6
Intended and Unintended Consequences
Purposes/intentions of our behaviour and resulting
unexpected unintended outcome
Example: Parents’ strictness and children’s deviance in
protest against orthodoxy
New York building owners – told to renovate to accommodate
more people
They abandoned the old buildings causing scarcity in
accommodation space
Reservation policy in India
7
 Its sociologists task to understand the resulting balance between social
reproduction and social transformation
 Social reproduction – how societies keep going over time

 Social transformation – changes societies undergo
 Social reproduction – occurs bcoz there is continuity in what people do,

how they behave, the practices they follow day to day, year to year
 Sociology is a science that involves systematic methods of investigation

and evaluation of theories in the light of evidence and logical argument
 But cant be directly modelled on natural science
8
General Subject Matter of Sociology
(Alex Inkles 1964)
1.Sociological analysis – Human Culture & Society, Sociological
Perspective, Scientific Method In Social Science
2.Primary units of social life – Soc. Acts & Soc Rel., Groups,
Communities etc.
3.Basic social institutions – Family, Religious, Economic, Political,
Educational etc.
4.Fundamental social processes – Social Stratification,
Socialisation, Cooperation, Assimilation, Accommodation,
Social Control, Social Conflict, Social Change
9
Sociology in 2017!
• Contents in the Text books of Anthony Giddens and David
Newman
Individual and Society, Social Construction of Knowledge and
Reality, Identity Building: Socialisation, Social Relationships:
Family, Crime and Social Deviance, Organisations,
Institutions, Social Stratification: Gender, Class, Caste, Race,
Ethnicity and Inequality, Religion and Modern Society, Ageing
and Old age, Media, Work and Economic Life, Cities and
Urban Spaces, Politics, Government and Terrorism, Science,
Technology and Society, Globalisation and Social Change
10
11
Lecture 3
History of Science: Thomas Kuhn
Dr. Anindya Jayanata Mishra
1
Framework
 History of Science
 Importance
 Factors of change
 Types: Internal & External
 Merton Thesis
2
Development of the Field
 Two historiographic tradition
1. Early 1900s, narratives written by practicing scientists
on their specialties
– Idea was to elucidate the concepts of their specialty
– Establish tradition
– Attract students
– Example: Legrange (Mathematics), Montucia
(Mathematics and Physical Science), Priestly
(Electricity and Optics), Delambre (Astronomy)
3
2. Philosophical concerns of creative activity in the history of
science
– Francis Bacon: To discover the nature and proper use of
human reason
– Example: Condorcet and Auguste Comte
 Descriptive approach: chronology of accumulating positive
achievement in a technical specialty
 Objective: Clarify and deepen understanding of current
science by displaying their evolution
4
Factors of Change
 Shift in philosophical approach (late 19th century) [Distinguish
positive knowledge from error & superstition]
- Bertrand Russell: To understand philosophers, emphathise
what it feels like to believe in their theories
 Importance to past / as base for present [medieval physical

thought as a base of 17th century physical science]
-Due to discovery of medieval science and its Renaissance
role, general history and history of science can be integrated
5
 Importance to positive knowledge as whole / general histories of
science (Evident in the work of Paul Tannery and George Sarton)
 Even great scholarship can not tailor joint evolution of all sciences
to a coherent narrative
 Near impossible to trace the current division of knowledge in

science curricula to past
 Considering Role of institutional / socio-economic factors in

development of science
6
Internal History
– No external factors
– Investigation starts from scratch through scientists’ view
– What problems his ‘subject’ worked at and how these
become problems for him
– Few professional historians
– Physics, chemistry and astronomy dominate the literature
– Few on biological and earth sciences – late professional
status
7
Set Science in Cultural Context: 3 Forms
1. Study of scientific institutions
 Bishop Sprat study of Royal Society of London or
Guerlac’s Professionalisation of French Chemistry
or Schofield’s history of Lunar Society or Caldwell’s
study of England or Dupree’s study of USA
2. Impact of science on Western Thoughts
 Nicolson’s study of Science in 17th & 18th century
literature, Roger’s work on role of life sciences in
18th century French Thought
8
3. Study of science in a geographical area – helps in
understanding of science’s social role and setting
 Impact of French Revolution on Science, American
Science and the most prominent one – the
development of science in 17th century England –
tells a lot about origin of modern science and nature
of history of science
9
Merton Thesis
 Most visible in debate about 17th century science
 I - Baconian’s attention on practical problems and study of
craftsmen / arts are the reasons for substantive
transformation experienced by a number of sciences
 II – Puritanism as a stimulant
 Supported and criticized
10
Scope of History of Science
 Importance of History
 Better History
 Rich depository of old ideas
 Helps in development of Philosophy of Science &
Sociology of Science & science of science (Derek
Price: Theoretic analysis of structure and behaviour of
science itself)
 Stimulants for policy making process
11
Reference
 Thomas S. Kuhn. The History of Science, In David L.

Sills (ed). 1968. International Encyclopaedia of the
Social Sciences. Macmillan Company & Free Press, V.
14, p.74-83.
12
Lecture 4
Locating Humanities & Social Sciences in
Institutes of Technology Part 1
Ravinder Kaur
1
Institutes of Technology: Ravinder Kaur
 Positioning of sociology in technology institutes raises

question of how and what to teach and place and space of
HSS discipline
 The current article examines the structural maps of
universities and technology institutions and explores the
political economy which differentially values the contribution
of various forms of disciplinary knowledge
2
Subjects such as English literature, economics, sociology,
philosophy, psychology etc. taught along with engineering
and other sciences
 What purpose or ‘felt need’ such ‘soft discipline’ are
expected to serve or fulfill?
 Rational for the general education programme Purdue
University –
– Such courses integral part of engineering curricula
– It enables the engineering students to appreciate the
world in which they live and work
3
 Provides a framework for rational inquiry, critical
evaluation, judgment and decisions when dealing with
issues that are non-quantifiable and ambiguous or
controversial
 The Lewis Committee on educational survey, 1947: MIT
should emphasise four general areas of education and
each area to be organised as separate school with its own
dean
 Engineering science, Science, Architecture and Planning
and HSS
4
 MIT – Known both for its engineers and social scientists
 MIT tried to humanise the scientist, Harvard tried to

scienticise the Humanist
 Undergrad curriculum in US – students have almost free

choice of electives spanning arts and sciences
 Need to question the doctrine of ethical neutrality in

sciernce and technology led to creating space for HSS in
technical institutions
5
 Example: the rationality/irrationality of Vietnam war led
to, for instance, creation of programme of ‘Values,
Technology and Science’ at Stanford University
 HSS disciplines – provide context for societal
understanding, cultural training understanding of moral
issues and ambiguity
 Example: failure of big technology like large dams,
ethical questions in genetic engineering led to
questioning the assumed value neutrality of science and
technology
 IITs based themselves on MIT model
6
 Sarkar committee (1946): existing engineering
colleges fail to integrate science, engineering and
humanities
 IITs – to overcome this lacunae and strong

departments of science and humanities to be
established with status comparable to engg deptt.
 HSS not seen as service model as was the approach

of traditional engineering departments
7
Service Model of HSS
 In service model of HSS disciplines chosen on ‘perceived usefulness’
 For example, in a society like India with variable English language skills
and a perceived linkage between good English language skills and
professional success, English as language teaching takes on an
important role
 So, courses in communication skill (technical communication) and its

techno counterpart, language lab, accepted unquestionable in technology
institutes
8
 Language lab – expected to provide finishing school effect to the
immature gawky engineering students
 Psychology lab also has similar appeal
 Of social sciences economics seen as more useful, acquainting

students with world of commerce and industry
 Economics, due to its mathematical and statistical tools, finds easier

acceptance and considered to be harder while other disciplines are
considered to be soft
 Economists enjoy higher prestige than even engineers!
9
 Nigam and Indiresan: last 2-3 decades no engineer has been a
member of Planning Commission though engineers are responsible
for 80 percent of the planned expenditure. In industry, climb to the
top through sales, marketing and finance, not engineering ladders
 Hence, economics with its linkage with policy making and running
governments is reluctantly given respect in otherwise marginal HSS
departments
 Understanding of core economics is unavailable to students
 The discipline is bifurcated into useful and non-useful aspect
10
 Useful aspect is perceived to contribute directly to skill
development
 Management studies, seen as key to managing human
resources, has been on the rise across the globe
 Deadly combination of B. Tech and Management degrees
propel young engineers to lucrative management positions
 Following the logic of market, most engineering institutes
have introduced management courses
 If there is no independent department, then management
courses are floated through disciplines such as economics,
psychology, sociology and philosophy
11
 In such scenario, HSS department has been reduced to
specialized cells dealing with technical communication,
organizational behaviour, managerial economics, industrial
sociology, professional ethics
 The love affair with management studies may last as long as

market is convinced that it has something to deliver
 Wall Street is also showing preferences for Ph.D. in pure

sciences
12
 Service model of HSS has a hard time accommodating its
core disciplines on their own merits
 Where such disciplines survive they tend to get internally

split into their useful and non-useful components
 Thus destroying such split takes away the essence that

makes them the source of critical questioning and thoughts
13
14
Lecture 5
Institutes of Technology Part 2
Ravinder Kaur
1
Core Model
 IITs from their inception have followed a non-service model of
HSS
 Core model avoids demonstrating practical usefulness
 Sees training of students as an integrated effort
 Distinction between imparting training and imparting

education in the classical sense
2
 Curriculum is not need driven or market driven
 All HSS disciplines find their own merit as reflection and

understanding on society and human condition
 Teach students to develop a framework of rational enquiry, critical

evaluation, judgments and decisions when dealing with a range of
issues
 HSS disciplines allow the students to hold a mirror to society and to

oneself
3
 Have full-fledged PhD programmes on par with engineering
and science departments, producing research of international
standards
 In structuring of departments IITs have followed two models:
one with combination of core courses and electives and other
with only electives
 The faculty members have freedom to design and float new
courses with system of internal evaluation allowing faculty to
innovate and upgrade what they teach
 The interdisciplinary nature of these departments further
source of strength and fecundity
4
Status of HSS vis-à-vis Science & Engineering
 Has the spirit of the core model been sustained?
 If not, what are the reasons for decline or marginalization of

HSS department in these elite institutions?
 It is shortsighted to think that knowledge is divisible into

useful/useless
 Yet, there is a hierarchical ranking between the knowledge

provided by engineering and science disciplines and HSS
5
 Structurally in engineering institutes HSS departments
occupy marginal and not poor position
o Faculty size is small (irrespective of faculty strength,
students have to be taught)
o No direct concern with many affairs of the institutes
(entrance examination, science and engineering R&D
activity)
o Students are there to acquire degree in engineering, not in
HSS
o Inappropriate time slotting
6
 Many HSS faculty imbibe this marginality
 As a result they tend to be academically less demanding in
terms of grades, attendance etc.
 Students also internalise the characterisation of HSS courses
as ‘soft, light and easy’
 Pick electives which yields good grades and a professor who
is not fussy about attendance
 At the same time there are students who feel HSS courses
are the only courses which they enjoy with good teachers and
interesting subject matters
7
 The possibility of classes being interactive and discussion
based and subjects perceived as being useful and helping in
their overall development of the students attract many
engineering students to HSS courses
 RECs, converted to NITs, have also adopted the core model
of HSS disciplines
Two Cultures: The University and the Institute
 There is differential structure and character of the university
and the institute
 Different organizational structure promote different kind of
work culture
8
 While university framework promotes democracy, dissent,
openness, discussion and debate, technology institutes are more
regimented, insulated, apolitical, hierarchical and authoritarian (fear
of bad grades hinders any questioning of authority)
 Technological institutes considered as places of highly specialised
training
 Universities known as the locus of production of knowledge in all
disciplines (which allows scope for exploration and critical
questioning)
 Institutes has to remodel itself as university where space is created
for freedom to read, think, research and teach in respective
disciplines
9
 In general, they try to remain isolated from the outside world
 Still several IITians have broken out of the mould and taken to
activism of various kinds
 Even some have opted out of conventional engineering
careers by taking up development related issues
 While appreciating the role of engineers in society and making
science useful to society, C. P. Snow asked whether engineer
was merely an ‘ignorant specialist’
 The mutual ignorance of scientist/engineer and literary/social
science person would be disastrous
10
 Science and humanity need to inform each other about their
concerns, for example, ecology, biotechnology, IPR issues,
large dams and development debate, etc.
 Joint courses would serve to sensitize the students to social,
technical and environmental dimensions of the issue
 Faculty members of HSS departments need to highlight the
social context and framework of technology
 Engineers need to understand that science is a human
enterprise; hence, can not be ideology free
 Necessary keep the dialogue going among natural scientists,
social scientists and engineers and technologists
11
12
Ethos of Science: Robert K Merton
Lecture-06
Ethos of Science: Robert K. Merton Part I
Department of Humanities and Social sciences
1
Ethos of Science
 Science- deceptively inclusive word which refers to a variety of distinct
though interrelated items
It is commonly used to denote –
1. A set of characteristic methods by which knowledge is certified
2. A stock of accumulated knowledge stemming from the application of these
methods
3. Set of cultural values and morals governing the activities termed scientific
4. Any combination of the foregoing
 This article concerns with cultural structure of science and discuss science as
an institution
 This is an essay in the sociology of science and not an excursion in the
methodology
2
Ethos of Science
 Ethos of science is that affectively toned complex of values and norms
which is held to be binding on the man of science
 Norms are expressed in forms of prescriptions, proscriptions, preferences
and permissions
 They are legitimized in terms of institutional values
 These imperatives transmitted by precepts and examples and reenforced by
sanctions are in varying degrees internalized by scientists thus fashioning his
scientific concerns
 Though there is a tendency to link development of science with democratic
social order, this is not always true
3
The Ethos of Science
 The most diverse social structures have provided some measure of support to science
 For example, Charles II granted a charter to Royal Society of London and sponsored
Greenwich Observatory
 Academie Des Sciences founded under Louis XIV, Frederick I endowed the Berlin
Academy and St Petersburg Academy of Sciences was instituted by Peter The Great
 Institutional goal of science is the extension of certified knowledge
 Technical methods employed towards this end provide the relevant definition of
knowledge: empirically confirmed and logically consistent statements of regularities
 The institutional imperatives (mores) derived from the goal and the methods
 Four sets of institutional imperatives – universalism, communism, disinterestedness and
organized skepticism are taken to comprise the ethos of modern science
4
Universalism
 The imperative of universalism is rooted deep in impersonal character of science
 Truth-claims whatever their source are to be subjected to pre-established impersonal
criteria: consonant with observation and previously confirmed knowledge
 Acceptance or rejection of claims entering the list of science is not to depend on the
personal or social attributes of the protagonists, his race, class, religion, nationality
and personal qualities are irrelevant
 There is no privileged sources of scientific knowledge; the laws of science are the
same everywhere and are independent of the scientists involved.
 Objectivity precludes particularism; for example, Anglophobe can not repeal the law
of gravitation
 Science is impersonal and international
 Universalism finds for the expression in the demand that careers be open to talent
 To restrict scientific careers on grounds other than lack of competence is to prejudice
the furtherance of knowledge
 Free access to scientific pursuits is a functional imperative
5
Communism
 The substantive findings of science are a product of social collaboration and are
assigned to the community
 They constitute a common heritage in which the equity of the individual producer
is severely limited
 An eponymous law or theory does not enter into the exclusive possession of the
discoverer and his heirs
 Nor do the mores bestow upon them special rights of use and disposition
 A scientist’s claim to his intellectual properties is limited to that of recognition and
esteem
 Eponomy – for example, the Copernican system, Boyle’s Law is thus at once a
mnemonic and commemorative device
 For example, the controversy over the rival claims of Newton and Leibniz to the
differential calculus
 Nations or individuals may claim scientific discovery but this does not challenge
the status of scientific knowledge as common property
6
Communism
 Scientific knowledge is public knowledge; freely available to all. The
results of research do not belong to individual scientists, but to the world
at large.
 The communication of findings and diffusion of results are important
ethos of science
 It helps in advancing the boundaries of knowledge
 For example, Henry Cavendish, a scientist was considered selfish and
antisocial because of suppressing his findings
 A scientist who does not communicate his important findings to the
scientific community is condemned
7
Communism
 Communal character of science is further reflected in the recognition by
scientists of their dependence on a cultural heritage
 Newton: if I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of the
giants
 This classic statement expresses a sense of indebtedness to the common
heritage and a recognition of the essentially cooperative and selectively
cumulative quality of scientific achievement
 It also means scientific advance involves the collaboration of past and
present generation
 But communism of the scientific ethos is incompatible with the definition
of technology as private property in a capitalistic economy
 For example, the issues related to IPR
 “The inventor is one who has discovered something of value. It is his
absolute property. He may withhold the knowledge of it from the public.”
8
9
Ethos of Science: Robert K Merton
Lecture-07
Ethos of Science: Robert K. Merton Part II
1
Disinterestedness
 The principle of “disinterestedness” was described as “a passion for
knowledge, idle curiosity, altruistic concern with the benefit to humanity”
 Scientists are unbiased; science is conducted in order to further human
knowledge
 They have no personal stake in the acceptance or rejection of data or
claims
 Science involves absence of fraud (to a large extent!)
 Activities of Scientists are subject to rigorous policing
 The scientific research is under exacting scrutiny of fellow scientists
 Norm of disinterestedness into practice is effectively supported by the
ultimate accountability of scientists to their compeers
 The possibility of exploiting the credulity, ignorance and dependence of
the layman is thus considerably reduced
2
Organized Skepticism
 Scientists take nothing on trust
 Knowledge, whether new or old, must always be scrutinized for possible
errors of fact or inconsistencies of argument
 The principle of “organized scepticism” was described as “a
methodological and institutional mandate” implying “the suspension of
judgment until the facts are at hand”
 It involves detached scrutiny of beliefs in terms of empirical and logical
criteria
 This norm sometimes invites resistance from such spheres such as
religion, economy, polity or state as a challenge to existing
institutionalised attitude
 “Modern totalitarian society, anti-rationalism and the centralisation of
institutional control both serve to limit the scope provided for scientific
activity”
3
Norms Counter- Norms
Universalism Particularism
Scientific claims and findings are judged A scientist’s social characteristics are
independently of the personal or social factors which importantly influence how
attributes of their proponents-social class, his/her work will be judged
race, religion
Communism Individualism
Findings and discoveries are not the Property rights are extended to include
properties of the individual researcher but protective control over results
belong to the scientific community and to
society at large
Norms Counter- Norms
Disinterestedness Interestedness
Scientists pursue their primary aim, Individual researcher seeks to serve his/her
knowledge, progress and indirectly achieve own interest and those of the restricted group
individual rewards of scientists to which s/he belongs
Organized Skepticism Organized Dogmatism

Every researcher is obliged to scrutinize every Scientists must believe in his/her findings with
hypothesis or findings carefully, including his utter conviction while doubting those of others
own, suspending the final judgment until the I. Mitroff (1974): Norms and Counter- Norms
necessary confirmation becomes available in a Select Group of The Apollo Moon
Scientists: A Case Study of the Ambivalence
of Scientists, American Sociological Review,
39:579-595
6
Lecture 08
Science and Technology of 17th Century England: R. K.
Merton

1
Science and Economy of 17th century England: R.K.Merton
 Interplay between socio-economic and scientific development
 Sociologists of science – concerned with types of influence involved (facilitative and obstructive)
 Extent to which these types prove effective in different soc structures and the processes through
which they operate
Formulation of Problem
1. Identification of the personal motivation of scientists with the structural determinants of their
research
2. Belief that socio-economic factors serve to account exhaustively for the entire complex of
scientific activity
3. Imputation of social needs where these needs are absent
 Motives can be – personal aggrandisement or “wholly disinterested desire to know”

 Development of 17th century science – determined by social structure of the time
 Exm: Newton’s reliance on astronomical observation made possible bcoz Greenwich observatory
built for benefit of Royal Navy
2
 Relation between science and social needs – two fold
 direct: some research is deliberately done for utilitarian purposes
 indirect: certain problems and materials for sc. research stems from practical exigencies(a state
requiring urgent action) though scientists may not be aware
 17th century science and technology were not devoid of each other as Sombart argued
 Many scientists turned their theoretical knowledge to practical problems
 Newton, Boyle, Hooke, Halley, Huyghens, Wren
 Military demands prompted increased speed in ship building and improvements in naval
architecture
 For example, ship building was furthered by military interest in three ways. First, more and larger
ship needed, second, they were required within a short period, and third, need for warships
 Statistics suggests expansion in both mercantile and military marine since late 16th century
 Increase of commercial voyages to distant points, India, North America, Africa, Russia, stressed
the need for accurate and expedient means of determining position at sea of finding latitude and
longitude
3
 Scientists were concerned with possible solution to this problem
 Mathematics and astronomy were advanced manifold through research in this direction
 For example, Napier’s invention of logarithm expanded by Henry Briggs, Adrian Vlacq, Edmund Gunter and
Henry Gellibrand was of help to astronomer and mariner
 Sprat, historiographer: advancement of navigation was one of the chief aims of Royal Society
 The findings of longitude was one problem that engrossed the scientists and fostered profound developments
in astronomy, mathematics, geography, mechanics and invention of clock and watch
 Social acclaim and social mobility and economic benefits of discovery and invention played crucial part in
development of science and technology
 Another navigational problem was determining the time of the tides
 Many scientists: Newton, Boyle, Halley, John Wallis, Euler, Bernoulli, Leplaxce etc, made contribution to this
field
 A fine example of correlation of scientific interests and economic needs
 Depletion of forest resources (woods) – required in shipbuilding, in naval wars, as fuel, as housing material
 Scientists developed botanical knowledge to solve this problem
4
 Sir Walter Raleigh listed six major qualities of a good ship: strong build, speed, stout
scantling, ability to fight guns in all weather, ability lie easily in a gale, ability to stay
well
 Many scientists tried to devise means to satisfy the requirements
 First had to solve problems in basic sciences to solve the practical needs
 For exm: to understand ship speed, scientists had to work in hydrodynamics
 Thereby establishing a link between a given technical task and the purely scientific
investigation
 Wren: England must be masters of the sea, superior to all naval forces
 Need for better Inland transport led to more scientific investigation in this area
 Indicates attempts by scientists to provide technical solution to business enterprise- to
facilitate extension of markets – one major requirement of development of capitalism
5
Extent of Socio-Economic Influences upon the Selection of Scientific
Problems by Members of the Royal Society of London, 1661 – 62 & 1686 - 87
Total for the four years
Number Percent
Pure Science 333 41.3
Science related to Socio-Economic Needs 473 58.7
Marine Transport 129 16.0

Mining 166 20.6
Military Technology 87 10.8
Textile Industry 26 3.2
General Technology & Husbandry 65 8.1
Total 806 100

6
It appears that less than half of the investigations conducted in those four years classifiable
as ‘pure science’
 Rest of the research influenced by practical requirements
 Problems of marine transport attracted the most attention
 Problems of military nature left its impress upon the scientific development
 Mining developed markedly during this period
 Research in the field of mineralogy and metallurgy initiated with the aim of discovering
new utilizable ores and new methods of extracting metals from the ores
 Finally, it seems justifiable to assert that range of problems investigated by 17th century
English scientists was quite influenced by the socio-economic structure of the period
7
8
Lecture 9
Matthew Effect in Science: R. K. Merton Part 1

1
Matthew Effect in Science R K Merton
This paper – looks at allocation of rewards to scientists – in turn affects flow of ideas and findings through
communication network of science
Based on interviews of Nobel Laureates by Harriet Zuckerman and diaries, letters, biographies, notebooks and
scientific papers of other scientists
Problem of 41st Chair
It is assumed that Nobel prize – ultimate accolade in science and the recipients – distinct from others
But those who have not received it have contributed to science immensely
Derived from French academy of science – who decided to nominate 40 outstanding scientists as members
The occupants of 41st chair include – Descarte, Moliere, Flaubert, Diderot, Rousseau, Saint-Simon, Pascal,
Zola, Proust, Stendahl, Bayle, etc.
What holds for French academy – holds for other insti or orgn designed to reward talent – there are always
occupants of 41st chair
Can be due to – errors of judgment, fixed no. of rewards at the summit of recognition, large numbers of
contributions at a time excludes some scientists who in other era could easily have got it, no scope for
posthumous award etc., less no. of prestigious awards though can carry better cash rewards
2
Matthew Effect in Science R K Merton
 In stratification system of honour – there is sometimes ‘ratchet effect’ – once having achieved a particular
degree of eminence do not fall below that level (though can be outdistanced by newcomers)
 Can be due to – high expectations which can create its own motivation and stress, perceived belief in their
continuing potential (once a Nobel Laureate always a Nobel Laureate)
 Such reward system can be converted to instrumental asset – enlarged facilities can be made available to
decorated scientists
 Such system can create a ‘class structure’ – differential access to means of scientific production, stratified
distribution of chances among scientists
 Thus there is a continuous interplay between reward system based on honour and prestige and a class
system based on differential life chances which locates scientists in differing positions in the opportunity
structure of science
 Social structure of science provides context for this inquiry
 Eminent scientists get disproportionately greater credit for their accomplishments than relative newcomers
 One Physics laureate put it – world is peculiar when it comes to giving credit, it tends to give credit to
already famous scientist
3
Matthew Effect in Science: R K Merton
 Such pattern of recognition happens primarily
 A. in cases of collaborations
 B. in cases of independent multiple discoveries made by scientists of distinctly different rank
 Chemistry laureate makes a point: when people see my name on a paper, they are apt to remember it not
the other names
 A physiology and medicine guy says: you remember the names you are familiar with, even if it is the last,
it sticks in your mind
 People look at the acknowledgement section and say: oh, this is from green’s lab or so and so’s lab, you
remember that -than long list of authors-contributors
 Matthew Effect - taken from Saint Matthew’s gospel - consists in accruing of greater increments of
recognition for particular scientific contributions to scientists of considerable repute and
withholding of such recognition to scientists who have not made their mark
 Nobel Laureates are aware of this phenomenon and try to counteract it by – sometimes refusing to put
their name to joint projects
 Some eminent ones think: if my name is first, people will think I am the main guy, others are just
technicians, if my name is last, I shall get credit anyway so I want others to have bit of glory
4
 It leads to double unintended injustice: unknown scientists unjustifiably victimised and famous ones unjustifiably
benefitted
 Matthew effect seen in terms of a basic inequity in the reward system that affects the careers of individual scientists
• But it has other implications as well
• Matthew effect in the communication system
 Though M E is dysfunctional for newcomers, but can be functional and positive for scientific communication – it
may work to heighten the visibility of a particular work if it bears the name of a famous scientist
 There is exponential increase in volume of scientific work – makes it increasingly difficult to read all
 In such a situation, the readers read works by people of better professional credentials
• Matthew effect and Character of science
• Science is public and socially shared even though the very process of discovery is private
• Making of discovery may be complex personal experiences
• For science to be advanced, it has to go beyond new experiments developed, new ideas originated, new problems
formulated, new methods instituted
• The innovation must be effectively communicated to others
• Contribution to science means something given to the common fund of knowledge
• In the end, science, then, is the socially shared and socially validated body of knowledge
5
6
Lecture 10

1
Matthew Effect and Multiple Discoveries
It’s a fact that great scientists are typically involved in multiple discoveries
Holds for Newton, Faraday, Galileo, Maxwell, Cavendish, Lavoisier, Thomas Alva Edison etc
Kelvin, for instance, involved in 32 or more multiple discoveries
So it took 32 other men to contribute what Kelvin did individually!
Social and Psychological Bases of Matthew Effect
Greater visibility of contri. By reputed scientists not merely an impact of their personal prestige but a result of
their certain part of their socialisation, scheme of values and their social character
Focalising – a distictive fuction of eminent scientists
Exm: Sigmund Freud, Fermi, Delbruck – they play charismatic role
They excite the mind of the contemporaries and successors
They pass on a series of norms and values that governs research
Their personal influence becomes routinized, their charisma “institutionalised”
They have a knack of problem finding than only problem solving
Pass on the taste for and judgement of finding problems of fundamental importance
This , the eminent scientists invariably got it in their formative years of training from an evocative environment
For exm: 55 of current Nobelists interviewed, 34 worked with 46 Nobelists in young days
2
Social and Psychological Bases of Matthew Effect
 Great scientists have exceptional ego strength
 Tremendous self confidence (to the extent of attractive arrogance), ability to critically evaluate others’
and own work, capacity to tolerate frustration, absorb repeated failure (research - a rough game),
prepared to tackle diff problems than easy and secure ones
 Wait for big problems and wait for delayed gratification – their taste acquired early in creative
environments help them tackle big problems, fundamental problems, beautiful problemst
 Hence their output is eagerly waited, get more notice and visibility
 In another way, they get notice bcoz they ignore smaller, peripheral problems, avoid pedestrian work
 They many a times abandon reporting mediocre findings – avoid the itch to publish to ensure quality
 That in turn is linked to M E as people say: Freud or Fermi or Feynman decided to report it then it is
worth reading and hence gets more attention
 But this perspective is also dysfunctional under certain conditions!
3
 Though eminent scientists likely to make significant contributions, the lesser known and
young are also capable of making equally brilliant discoveries
 People do not begin by being eminent, they become one
 History of Science is replete with examples of Failure, neglect and disappointment of
now known scientists
 Waterston’s work on molecular velocity rejected as “nonsense”, Mendelian genetics
got poor response
 Fourier’s classic work on propagation of heat had to wait 13 years for publishing
 On contrary, Lord Raleigh’s work was considered for publication once the identity of
author known
 This violates the norm of universalism embodied in the institution of science
 This curbs the advancement of knowledge
4
5
Lecture 11

1
 Institutional version of Matthew Effect
 There is a stratification system operating in allocation of resources to institutions
 Centres of demonstrated excellence get more funding for research
 A classic case of Marxian idea of rich getting richer and poor poorer
 The richer insti, in turn, attracts more promising students
 6 elite insti (Harvard, Berkley, CalTech, Columbia and Chicago, Princeton) – produced (in mid
60s) 22% of PhDs in Physical and Bio Sciences of which 69% went on to get Nobel!
 The elite institutes also manage attract bright and exceptional faculty members which over a
period of time results in lopsided education delivery
 This social process of social selection deepens the concentration of scientific resources and talent
in certain elite institutions
 It reinforces the reflection of Matthew Effect in macro structures
2
Matthew Effect in Science II: Cumulative Advantage and the
Symbolism of Intellectual Property
Cumulative advantage
Social process through which opportunities, symbolic & material rewards that accumulate for
researchers & organizations
Accumulation of advantages and disadvantages for scientists & institutions
Widening gaps: initial comparative advantages of trained capacity, structural location & availability of
resources increments of advantage
In-equal / Skewed distributions in scientific research:
 papers produced
 use of papers by peers - publications & citations
 number of years & citations
Diffusion of findings of equal small scientists: repute > periphery universities
Top scientists from top universities
3
Matthew Effect in Science II: Cumulative Advantage and
the Symbolism of Intellectual Property
Institutionalised bias for Precocity
Ignoring potential of late bloomers
(Maths, Physics & humanities)
Inequality:
 peer recognition
 access to resources
Contextual difference (social class or fields of intellectual activity) &
individual differences in patterns of intellectual growth – affects success &
failure for potential late bloomers
4
Countervailing processes
Efforts by seniors to counter

Priority to juniors in co-authorships
(Lecturers to Professors – authorship changes)
Refusal to co-author
Competition between different scientific units for resources
Accommodation capacity of research units – limited to a certain extent
Mobility of dissatisfied scientists
Government initiatives
5
Symbolism of Intellectual property in Science
In science, one’s private property is established by giving its substance away
Only after communicating/ publishing work – scientists can legitimately own it/ secure it as their
contribution
Positive recognition by peers – basic form of reward – all other (monetary or career advance or
material scientific capital) derive from it
References & citations - not nuisance but incentive to scientists
Normative guidelines of reciprocity ( or else amounts to Plagiarism)
Serves two functions
1. Instrumental: Directs the readers to the original source - leads to
further source of knowledge
2. Symbolic: Peer recognition, registers the intellectual property of the author, maintains
intellectual tradition
6
7
Lecture 12
Structure of Scientific Revolutions:
Thomas Kuhn Part 1
1
Structure of Scientific Revolutions
• Outline – Theory
• Pre-paradigm
• Paradigm (Normal Science; Puzzle Solving; Priority)
• Anomaly
• Crisis
• Response & Emergence of New Paradigm
• Nature of Scientific Revolutions
2
Transitions
•Ptolemaic cosmology  Copernican

•Newtonian Physics  Einsteinian Relativity
•Classical mechanics  Quantum Mechanics
•Maxwellian Electromagnetic worldviewEinsteinian Relativity
•Lamarckian theories of evolution  Darwin’s theory
3
What is Paradigm?
• Universally recognised scientific achievements that for a
time provide model problems & solutions to a community of
practitioners
• “Some accepted examples of actual scientific practice –
examples which include law, theory, application &
instrumentation together – provide models from which
spring particular coherent traditions of scientific research”
• Examples: Ptolemaic/Copernican astronomy,
Aristotelian/Newtonian Dynamics, Corpuscular/Wave optics
4
What is Paradigm?
Paradigms guide scientists in:

• what is to be observed and scrutinized,
• the kind of questions that are supposed to be asked and
probed for answers in relation to this subject,
• how these questions are to be put,
• how the results of scientific investigations should be
interpreted.
5
What is Paradigm?
Paradigms help scientific communities to bound their discipline
in that they help the scientist to
1. create avenues of inquiry
2. formulate questions
3. select methods with which to examine questions
4. define areas of relevance
Pre-paradigm / route to normal science
•Random collection of mere facts
•Different school of thoughts
•A theory better than others in explaining phenomena
•Acceptance of one predominating thought
•More number of advocates / followers
6
Normal science
 Refers to the relatively routine, day-to-day work of scientists working within a
paradigm
 Research is "a strenuous and devoted attempt to force nature into the
conceptual boxes supplied by professional education”
 Doing research is essentially like solving a puzzle. Puzzles have rules. Puzzles
generally have predetermined solutions.
 “The man who is striving to solve a problem defined by existing knowledge and
technique is not just looking around. He knows what he wants to achieve, and he
designs his instruments and directs his thoughts accordingly”
 Striking feature of doing research is that the aim is to discover what is known in
advance
 Studies that fail to find the expected are usually not published.
 The proliferation of studies that find the expected helps ensure that the
paradigm/theory will flourish.
7
Nature of Normal science / Paradigm
• Not necessarily explains all ‘un-explained’
• Passing on ‘agreement on fundamentals’
• General adherence to what is to be observed and
scrutinized,
• Provides the kind of questions / puzzles that are supposed to
be asked and probed for answers in relation to this subject,
• how these questions are to be dealt
• how the results of scientific investigations should be
interpreted.
• Restricted view of world
8
Nature of Normal science / Paradigm
• Revolutions within sub fields of paradigm
• Example: Aristotle (Physica), Ptolemy (Almagest), Newton (Principia and
Optiks), Franklin (electricity), Lavoisier (Chemistry), Lyell (Geology)
• Helped define the legitimate problems and methods of a research field
for a succeeding generations of practitioners
Classics, text books (both elementary & advanced) in a field further solidifies Normal
Science (due to 2 factors)
1. Achievements of these classics sufficiently unprecedented to attract group of

adherents away from competing modes of scientific activity
2. At the same time, they are sufficiently open-ended to leave all sorts of problems
for the redefined group of practitioners to follow
9
10
Lecture 13
Structure of Scientific Revolutions:
Thomas Kuhn Part 2
1
Structure of Scientific Revolutions
• Outline – Theory
• Pre-paradigm
• Paradigm (Normal Science; Puzzle Solving; Priority)
• Anomaly
• Crisis
• Response & Emergence of New Paradigm
• Nature of Scientific Revolutions
2
Transitions
•Ptolemaic cosmology  Copernican

•Newtonian Physics  Einsteinian Relativity
•Classical mechanics  Quantum Mechanics
•Maxwellian Electromagnetic worldviewEinsteinian Relativity
•Lamarckian theories of evolution  Darwin’s theory
3
Anomaly
• Phenomena unexplainable by existing paradigm
• Puzzle requiring alternative solutions
• Unanticipated outcomes derived from theoretical studies can lead to the
perception of an anomaly and the awareness of novelty.
• Initially anomalies can be ignored, denied, or unacknowledged
• Normal science does not aim at novelty of fact or theory
• Discovery – novelty of fact & Invention – novelty of theory
• Fundamental novelties of fact and theory bring about paradigm change
• Failure to achieve the expected solution to a puzzle discredits only the
scientist and not the theory ("it is a poor carpenter who blames his tools“)
• Crisis is always implicit in research because every problem that normal
science sees as a puzzle can be seen from another viewpoint
4
Anomaly
• An anomaly can call into question fundamental generalizations of the paradigm
• New methods & followers
• Emergence of new paradigm
• Strong frictions between old & new
• Anomaly as expected puzzle of new Paradigm
• Indispensability of old Paradigm to create new
• Transition from old to new Paradigm  scientific revolutions
• Similar to pre-paradigmatic phase
• Scientific revolutions = political revolutions
• Paradigm shift: a change in basic assumptions within the ruling theory of science
• The paradigm change is complete when the paradigm/theory has been adjusted
so that the anomalous become the expected
• The result is that the scientist is able "to see nature in a different way"
5
Scientific Revolutions
• Old Paradigm replaced either in whole or in part (incompatible)
• New assumptions (paradigms/theories) require the reconstruction of prior
assumptions and the reevaluation of prior facts
• i. changes some of the field's foundational theoretical generalizations
• ii. changes methods and applications
• iii. alters the rules
• This is difficult and time consuming.
• It is also strongly resisted by the established community
• When a shift takes place, "a scientist's world is qualitatively transformed [and]
quantitatively enriched by fundamental novelties of either fact or theory"
• Transition to new paradigm is not a cumulative process
• Revolution is not cumulation; revolution is transformation
• The need to change the meaning of established and familiar concepts is
central to the revolutionary impact of a new paradigm.
6
Incommensurability
• If the fundamental assumptions of old and new paradigm
were not incompatible, novelty could always be explained
within the framework of the old paradigm and crisis can
always be avoided
• The reception of a new paradigm often necessitates a
redefinition of the corresponding science
• “The normal-scientific tradition that emerges from a
scientific revolution is not only incompatible but often
actually incommensurable with that which has gone
before”
7
Invisibility of Revolution
• Because paradigm shifts are generally viewed not as revolutions but
as additions to scientific knowledge, and because the history of the
field is represented in the new textbooks that accompany a new
paradigm, a scientific revolution seems invisible
• The historical reconstruction of previous paradigms and theorists in
scientific textbooks make the history of science look linear or
cumulative
• These misconstructions render revolutions invisible
• Science textbooks present the inaccurate view that science has
reached its present state by a series of individual discoveries and
inventions that, when gathered together, constitute the modern body
of technical knowledge— not the addition of bricks to a building
8
Scientific Revolutions and Paradigm Shifts
 During scientific revolutions, scientists see new and different things when looking with
familiar instruments in places they have looked before
 Familiar objects are seen in a different light and joined by unfamiliar ones as well.
 Scientists see new things when looking at old objects
 This difference in view resembles a gestalt shift, a perceptual transformation— “what
were ducks in the scientist's world before the revolution are rabbits afterward”
 In a gestalt switch, alternate perceptions are equally "true" (valid, reasonable, Real)
 A gestalt switch: "I used to see a planet, but now I see a satellite." (This leaves open the
possibility that the earlier perception was once and may still be correct)
 A paradigm shift: " I used to see a planet, but I was wrong.“
 Anomalies and crises "are terminated by a relatively sudden and unstructured event like
the gestalt switch"
9
Reference
Read:
Summary of Thomas Kuhn’s ‘The Structure of Scientific
Revolutions’ by Prof. Pajares
(http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/kuhnsyn.html)
http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/Kuhn.html
10
11
Lecture 14
Science as Falsification: Karl Popper Part 1

1
Science as Falsification: Karl Popper
• Karl Popper – Introduction
• Philosophy of science
• 1902 – 1994
• One of the pioneers
• Questioned contemporary ‘science’
• Rejected empiricism / Induction methods
• Impact goes beyond study of science
• Focus on ‘falsifiability’
2
Examples of statements falsifiable and nonfalsifiable
No human lives forever
All humans live forever
Some swans are white.
From this, one may wish to infer that:
All swans are white.
There are black swans found in Australia
All swans are white except those found in Australia
The logic of his theory is utterly simple :

if a single ferrous metal is unaffected by a magnetic field it cannot be the case
that all ferrous metals are affected by magnetic fields
There exists a green swan (can u falsify the statement?)
For every metal, there is a temperature at which it will melt.
3
 Criterion – science and non-science
 Criterion of the scientific status of a theory is its falsifiability, or
refutability, or testability
 Problem of demarcation: the criterion of falsifiability is a solution to
this problem of demarcation
 Einstein’s theory of gravitation, Marx’s Theory of class struggle,
Freud’s theory of psychoanalysis, Adler’s individual psychology
 Except Einstein, other theories, acc to Popper, not compatible with
most divergent human behaviour
 Freud’s id, ego and superego – no different from Homer’s collected
stories in Olympus!!!
 The theories describe some facts, but in manner of myths, it
contains psychological suggestions but not in testable form
4
5
Lecture 15
Science as Falsification: Karl Popper Part 2

1
1. It is easy to obtain confirmations, or verifications, for nearly every
theory – if we look for confirmations
2. Confirmations should count only if they are the result of risky
predictions; that is to say, if, unenlightened by the theory in question,
we should have expected an event which was incompatible with the
theory - an event which would have refuted the theory
2
3. Every "good" scientific theory is a prohibition: it forbids certain
things to happen. The more a theory forbids, the better it is
4. A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-

scientific. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often
think) but a vice
5. Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, or to refute

it. Testability is falsifiability
3
6. Confirming evidence should not count except when it is the
result of a genuine test of the theory; and this means that it can
be presented as a serious but unsuccessful attempt to falsify the
theory
7. Some genuinely testable theories, when found to be false, are
still upheld by their admirers - for example by introducing ad hoc
some auxiliary assumption, or by reinterpreting the theory ad
hoc in such a way that it escapes refutation. Such a procedure
is always possible, but it rescues the theory from refutation only
at the price of destroying, or at least lowering, its scientific
status
 Popper calls such a rescue operation “conventionalist twist” or
“conventionalist stratagem”
4
• The world was full of verification and confirmation of
theories of Marx, Freud and Adler
• Adler example: thousand-and-one fold experience!
• Freud and Adler: Man pushing a child to drown, another
person trying to rescue
• Freud explains in terms of repression and sublimation
and Adler in terms of inferiority complex
• A fitting theoretical explanation is always there!
• Astrology Vs Astronomy
5
• A theory is scientific only if it is refutable by a
conceivable event
• Every genuine test of a scientific theory, then, is
logically an attempt to refute or to falsify it, and one
genuine counter-instance falsifies the whole theory
• It is logically impossible to conclusively verify a
universal proposition by reference to experience but a
single counter-instance conclusively falsifies the
corresponding universal law. In a word, an exception,
far from ‘proving’ a rule, conclusively refutes it
6
• In Popper's view, the advance of scientific knowledge is an evolutionary process
characterized by his formula:
• PS1 – TT1 - EE1 - PS2
• In response to a given problem situation (PS1), a number of competing conjectures, or
tentative theories (TT), are systematically subjected to the most rigorous attempts at
falsification possible
• This process, error elimination (EE), performs a similar function for science that natural
selection performs for biological evolution. Theories that better survive the process of
refutation are not more true, but rather, more "fit"—in other words, more applicable to the
problem situation at hand (PS1)
• Consequently, just as a species' "biological fit" does not predict continued survival;
neither does rigorous testing protect a scientific theory from refutation in the future
• For Popper, it is in the interplay between the tentative theories (conjectures) and error
elimination (refutation) that scientific knowledge advances toward greater problems
7
Reference
• Excerpts from original
• Karl Popper, Science as Falsification, In Conjectures and
Refutations, London: Routledge and Keagan Paul, 1963,
pp. 33-39; from Theodore Schick, ed., Readings in the
Philosophy of Science, Mountain View, CA: Mayfield
Publishing Company, 2000, pp. 9-13
• http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/popper_falsification.h
tml
8
9
Lecture 16
Scientist as an Indexical Reasoner Part 1

1
Scientist as an Indexical Reasoner: The Contextuality
and the Opportunism of Research
Author: Karin D Knorr-Cetina
From the Book: The Manufacture of Knowledge: An

essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of
Science, Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1981, 2nd Chapter,
pp. 33-48
2
Scientist as an Indexical Reasoner
o Scientific research and Laboratory selections
o Lab selections are local, depends on context of research and concrete research
situation
o Scientific research as locally situated operation
o Theoretical framework: Ethno-methodology
o Meanings are held to be “situationally determined” dependent on concrete

context in which they appear through practical actions in day to day social
interaction
o Indexicality: refers to situational contingency and contextual locations of

scientific action
3
o Products of scientific research are fabricated and negotiated by
particular agents at a particular time and place
o Products are carried out by particular interests of these agents
o Local rather than universally valid interpretations
o Scientific research in many (most?) cases not outgrowth of scientific
rationality
Opportunism of Research
o Tinkerers: do not know what they are going to produce, use whatever
they find around them to produce workable object
o In contrast to engineers, tinkerers always manage with odds and
ends
4
o Final product represents “not a perfect product of engineering but a patchwork of
odd sets pieced together when and where opportunity arose
o Scientists also display opportunism
o Does not mean they are irrational, unsystematic or career oriented in their
procedure
o Opportunism as a process not an individual characteristics
o It refers to indexicality of mode of production from the point of view of

occasioned character of the products of research
5
o Occasioned character of research manifests itself in study of a science lab by
author
o Role played by local resources and facilities
o Large Lab – well equipped, well staffed, supervised by experienced technical hand
who was considered extremely reliable and clever
o Lab where protein could be generated, modified and tested in large volumes
o Research problems were invented or research which required use of this lab
eagerly sought
o A newly purchased electron microscope utilising laser-beams held similar

attraction
6
o Scientists who controlled these resources went to great lengths to keep it from
other scientists!
o Opportunism and particular interests sustain each other
o A paper produced which analysed functional properties of proteins based almost
exclusively on chemical determinations supplied by institute’s service lab
o Scientific research and Laboratory selections
o Preference is also given to technical instruments and apparatus which scientist

have access to, within grasp
o Projects taken up to leverage equipments, certain measurements are taken

because “machines were here”
7
o Resources and facilities available are also negotiated and manipulated, equipments are
sometimes misused
o For example: pressure meter used to determine gas absorption capacity of a substance,
chemicals available in stock substituted for unavailable ones so as not to hamper ongoing
research
o Ideas are also circumstantially determined
o Can be triggered by resources and facilities available at a given time and place, dynamics of
interaction with other researchers or contingent upon other occasions
o Scientists refer to this as: ideas “occur” to them or “running into an idea” or “happened to
come across”!
8
9
Lecture 17
Scientist as an Indexical Reasoner Part 2

1
o Impact of local environment: These conditions and criteria reflect short
term concerns of exclusively local relevance
o Example: Use of foam instead of water for surface treatment of Plants in

chemical engineering lab in Northern California
o Local emphasis on chemical compositions which included a carefully

selected ingredients like sulphite bcoz its cheaper and simpler
o Energy crisis in US: Had implications on research projects
2
o Use of Ferric Chloride in heat coagulation of protein recovery apparently to save

energy
o Scientists well aware of situationally contingent nature of their products
o Keeping track of research papers in foreign languages bcoz “that hopefully

nobody here knows”!
o Scientists are not passive opportunists they use such extra knowledge as a
resource mobilisation and to gain credit
3
Local Idiosyncrasies
o Many other spatial and temporal contingencies determining decisions and
selections in research process
o Local employment regulation prohibiting testing after 4.30 pm or

weekends so that freezing and storing procedures must be used to
compensate for unmethodical interruptions but this is not reported in
resulting paper
o Local idiosyncrasies: research labs develop local interpretations of

methodical rules, a local know-how with regard to what is meant and how
to make things work the best in actual research practice
4
o Labs studied performed standard analyses of chemical compositions but without
replication under the assumption that such standard routines carried no risks or
uncertainties
o Scientist from other lab/town/area found it strange and unacceptable
o Precision without replication acc. to him was “crap”
o Clash of two locally developed systems of interpretation becomes apparent as

expectation of scientists who came from diff system was violated
5
o Questions of composition and quantification, what substance to be used in an
experiment and how much
o Though standard formulations exist still it is rejected as “routine composition

analyses” or “lag too far behind” or “too old” by current standards
o Variability of source material enhances differentiation and distinctiveness of

research products
o For example: Variation in local material used in bio sciences - this material
constitutes an additional source of constant variation – sometimes “nuisance”
6
Local idiosyncrasies
o Procedures used in experiments influenced by routinised local
interpretation
o For example: Fermentation time in protein research
o Measurement devices and instruments as further sources of potential

local variation
o For example: reference to brand names, identification of firms which

supplied particular instruments and provision of description of detailed
procedures in published papers
7
Decision Criteria
o Making a piece of knowledge involves a series of decisions and
negotiations – which consistently requires that selections be made
o Scientists themselves scrutinise decision criteria as one specific selection
out of many possible
o For example: in reference to specific aspect of research – cost
o In reference to specific equivalent such as money, time, effort etc.
o In some institute easier to buy equipment than hire manpower so
scientists preferred instrumental procedure than additional manpower
o What “works” in local conditions have an important say – selection of
substance, technique or composition formula - greater relevance of
success than truth
8
Variable Rules and Power
o Case study of a highly sophisticated lab with expensive equipments and well
trained staff
o Theoretically every scientist had access to the lab, so no scope for private
appropriation of scarce resources. But not in practice!
o Watkins, the research leader and an eminent scientist made it difficult for others to
use the facilities, the lab technical staff was under his control
o With use of personal power, bent the official rule and created a state of disorder
where anything was possible depending upon personal negotiation and particular
situation
9
Variable rules and Power
o Dietrich wanted to use “Watkins’ lab” and got his permission with conditions
o When Dietrich decided to experiment on his own, was refused bcoz “Watkins’ group”
needed to use the lab, plan to do experiment surreptitiously was also foiled!
o Third round of exchange was successful in the sense Watkins allowed Dietrich to use lab so
that Watkins can recheck the procedure adopted in their earlier collaboration
o Watkins’ attitude to Dietrich and his research interest changed from being neutral to
highly negative and resistant to, finally, positive
o The lab and experiment remained constant so also the official rule
10
Variable Rules and Power
o Rules were manipulated and negotiated between the two based on their changing
interests and interpretations
o Rules function, in this process, as instruments of negotiation and manipulation
rather than stabilising guidelines for action heeded by various actors
o Example: strict rule that manuscript be peer reviewed by two scientists in the
research centre is counteracted by scientists’ right to choose such reviewers
themselves
Concluding Observations
o Scientific method is locally situated

o Production of scientific knowledge is context-dependent
o Scientific activity is rooted in site of social action just as other forms of social life
11
12
Lecture 18
Science, Technology and Colonial power in
India Part 1
Associate Professor
1
British Policies: Two Perspectives
• Zaheer Baber, “Science, Technology and Colonial Power” in
Social History of Science in Colonial India, edited by S. Irfan
Habib & Dhruv Raina, Oxford University Press, 2009
• First perspective: Destruction of indigenous education system
and initiation of Public works
• Second perspective: Growth of Science and technology:
development of present scientific structure and Indian
Response
2
Early Phase of British Colonialism
• No explicitly formulated science and technology policy
• India as experimentation site
• State sponsored educational institutions for diffusing western
science and technology
• Destruction of indigenous educational system
• Anglicist – Orientalist controversy and Macaulay’s minute on
education
• Public works and technical education
3
Indigenous Educational System
• Adam’s report on vernacular education
– Madrassas, Pathshalas and Mathas
– Indigenous patronage to above
• Withdrawal of patronage and Resumption of land by the
Britishers
• Purely for extracting more revenue
e.g. In Bengal alone resumption lead to increase of Rs. 5 lacs
in revenue
4
James Mill and Macaulay’s Minute on
Education.
• Mill was chief examiner in 1828 and he was virtually the living
executive in India.
• Mill criticized orientalists and India as a whole.
• He assumed Indians to be rude, uncivilized, barbarous and
unscientific.
• Macaulay’s minute on education recommended the official
patronage for instruction in English and Western science and
withdrawal of funds for education in Sanskrit, Arabic or
Persian.
5
James Mill’s Utilitarian Philosophy
• Not having gone to India qualified him to have an objective view of Indian
culture & civilization
• “Good practices have solid foundation in sound theory”
• Formulation of a liberal programme to emancipate India from its own

culture
• Idea was to test his theory by arriving at a rational set of laws universally
applicable irrespective of time, culture and social context
• Deducing rational principles for restructuring societies that could be

implemented universally disregarding local variations
6
Public Works
• Irrigation and construction projects
e.g. Ganga Canal Project
• Introduction of Railways (1849)
• The telegraph (1852)
• Reorganization of postal system (1850)
7
8
Lecture 19
Science, Technology and Colonial power in
India Part 2
Associate Professor
1
Science and Technology Post 1857 : Constructive
Imperialism
• “In part by concession, in part by force, in part by constant
intervention of new scientific forces”
• Promotion to technical education and large public works
• PWD Engineers designated as “Scientific soldiers” – worked

in applied S&T such as forestry research, coal exploration &
mining, manufacturing of iron rails and locomotive design
2
• Theoretical scientific research and teaching: visibly
discouraged
• The recurring famines: mass deaths, loss of livestock

and huge loss of revenue from agriculture
• Need: Stability and thrust to agriculture
3
Promotion of Scientific Research
• Famine Commission
• The Report of Famine Commission of 1880
• Recommendation:
• Agriculture departments
• Promotion of study of astronomy, chemistry, telegraphy,
agriculture and forestry, meteorological research
• However the famines continued unabated. Reason?

• No changes in Social and economic policies
4
The Great Experiment
• George Curzon, the new viceroy from 1898
 Imperial agricultural Research Institute at Pusa in Bengal
 Experimental farms and agriculture colleges
 Board of Scientific Advice (BSA) in 1902 to coordinate all scientific

research in India (meteorology, terrestrial magnetism, agriculture,
soils & manure, forestry products & veterinary sciences)
 Nature Journal published Indian experiments
5
Board of Scientific Advice
 A ‘controlled experiment in the vast social laboratory of Imperial India’
 The basis for ’British Science Guild’ in 1905
 Precursor to various research councils and committees such as Indian

Science Congress (1924), Economic Advisory Council (1930), Scientific
Advisory Committee (1940-45), council for Scientific Policy (1966-73),
Central Advisory Committee on S&T (1967-70) National Institute of
Science (1935)
 Succeeded by Council for Scientific and Industrial Research in 1934
6
The Indian Response
• Western science and English: an important tool to attain the
‘urban elite’ status
• Spread of Western science: Raja Rammohan Roy and Sir

Syed Ahmad Khan
• Aligarh Scientific Society (1864)
• Mohammedan Anglo Oriental College (1877) (the

present Aligarh Muslim University)
7
• Theoretical science and teaching by Indians: discouraged
• The two great Indian scientists J.C. Bose and P.C. Ray: ill treated
• Indian Association for Cultivation of Science (ICAS) 1876
under native control: Mahendra Lal Sircar
• Wealthy patrons established professorship in Physics, Chemistry,
Botany, Applied Mathematics at University College, Calcutta
• Scientists like C.V. Raman
• Meghanad Saha: Science and Culture questioned Gandhian

method of deindustrialisation while P.C.Ray supported it later on
8
• Srinivas Ramanujan: Mathematical equations express thought of God
• Anthony Giddens: Structuration Theory of Structure and Agency can

explain the development of S&T in India
• Today’s scientific community and infrastructure was shaped during the

British Rule through structural changes and specific colonial policy
• At the same time the role of individual colonial administrators as well as

the active part played by Indian scientists and non scientists in
institutionalisation of Western Science in colonial India cannot be denied
9
10
Lecture 20
A Large Community But Few Peers: A Study of the Scientific
Community In India: E. Haribabu
Dr. A. J. Mishra
1
A Study of the Scientific Community In India:
E. Haribabu
 Modern science is recognised as legitimate social activity
 Analysis of scientific community would tell us the specific
features of the structure and organisation of science, values
and norms guiding the cognitive activities of scientific
community and interaction among science, economic and
political power structure of a society
 This paper looks at the Indian scientific community by
focusing on the pattern of evaluation of scientific work
2
E. Haribabu
Objective of the study
 How does the Indian scientific community operate with

reference to evaluation of scientific contributions?
 Does a peer review system exist?
 How effective it is?
 How do we account for the preference to publish their
research abroad?
3
E. Haribabu
Setting and Method
Location: Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore
Time of Data Collection: May- August 1990
Number of Scientists Interviewed: 19 (most of them Shanti
Swarup Bhatnagar and Young scientist awardees)
The scientists were engaged in “Frontier” research areas such
as Molecular Bio physics, Biochemistry, Solid State and
Structural Chemistry
4
E. Haribabu
Scarcity of Competent Peers
 Peer review is not satisfactory
 Peer review succeeds where good science is done
 Increasing mediocrity in Indian Science
 No objectivity in review system (objectivity works in large
group)
Cont…..
5
E. Haribabu
 No. of people working in a particular specialisation is very

less
 In the absence of critical mass, the communication and
collaboration among scientists is very limited
 Credibility of Indian Journals vis-à-vis foreign journals
6
E. Haribabu
Lack of Professionalism and Rigour
 Professionalism involves adoption of certain impersonal

criteria and standards
 Rigour implies meticulousness in evaluation
 This is not noticeable in case of reference system of journals

and assessment of project proposals
7
Preference for Seniors as Status Judges
 Junior scientists were more dissatisfied!
 “Grants are monopolised by big guys”
 Decisions are made by seniors
 Institutes like IISC Bangalore does not have any problem
getting funds – an indication of stratification system in science
 “Some big men who have big contacts have access to big
funds . They carry out big research and faster research”
 Funding agency should go by bio-data than seniority
8
E. Haribabu
Scientists’Association With Governmental Work
 Involvement of scientists in the committee system of the
funding agencies of the govt as advisors and experts
bring them closer to bureaucracy
 These small no of scientists define the thrust areas of
research
 They think they are an expert in every field!
Cont….
9
 Projects and funds are granted to peripheral academic
centres like Punjab, North-East and other border areas
 It indicates evaluation system being subject to political

pressures
 If good science implies widely shared cognitive orientation

coupled with equality of opportunity, then the inadequacies
of evaluation system in India can be minimised
10
11

Sociology NPTEL

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Sociology NPTEL

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sociology NPTEL

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecture 1

Sociology: Anthony Giddens Part 1

 What we regard as natural, inevitable, good or true – many

 The givens of our life are strongly influenced by historical

 Sociological outlook – understanding how our individual lives

 Example – Divorce, Unemployment (both personal & public

2. Use as drug – not considered a drug in most societies but is

 Social reproduction – how societies keep going over time

 Social reproduction – occurs bcoz there is continuity in what people do,

 Sociology is a science that involves systematic methods of investigation

 Importance to past / as base for present [medieval physical

 Near impossible to trace the current division of knowledge in

 Considering Role of institutional / socio-economic factors in

 Thomas S. Kuhn. The History of Science, In David L.

 Positioning of sociology in technology institutes raises

 MIT tried to humanise the scientist, Harvard tried to

 Undergrad curriculum in US – students have almost free

 Need to question the doctrine of ethical neutrality in

 IITs – to overcome this lacunae and strong

 HSS not seen as service model as was the approach

 So, courses in communication skill (technical communication) and its

 Psychology lab also has similar appeal

 Of social sciences economics seen as more useful, acquainting

 Economics, due to its mathematical and statistical tools, finds easier

 Economists enjoy higher prestige than even engineers!

 Understanding of core economics is unavailable to students

 The discipline is bifurcated into useful and non-useful aspect

 The love affair with management studies may last as long as

 Wall Street is also showing preferences for Ph.D. in pure

 Where such disciplines survive they tend to get internally

 Thus destroying such split takes away the essence that

 Core model avoids demonstrating practical usefulness

 Sees training of students as an integrated effort

 Distinction between imparting training and imparting

 All HSS disciplines find their own merit as reflection and

 Teach students to develop a framework of rational enquiry, critical

 HSS disciplines allow the students to hold a mirror to society and to

 If not, what are the reasons for decline or marginalization of

 It is shortsighted to think that knowledge is divisible into

 Yet, there is a hierarchical ranking between the knowledge

Organized Skepticism Organized Dogmatism

Dr. Anindya Jayanta Mishra

 Motives can be – personal aggrandisement or “wholly disinterested desire to know”

Marine Transport 129 16.0

Total 806 100

Dr. Anindya Jayanta Mishra

Dr. Anindya Jayanta Mishra

Dr. Anindya Jayanta Mishra

Efforts by seniors to counter

•Ptolemaic cosmology  Copernican

Paradigms guide scientists in:

1. Achievements of these classics sufficiently unprecedented to attract group of

•Ptolemaic cosmology  Copernican

Dr. Anindya Jayanta Mishra

The logic of his theory is utterly simple :

Dr. Anindya Jayanta Mishra

theory – if we look for confirmations

2. Confirmations should count only if they are the result of risky

predictions; that is to say, if, unenlightened by the theory in question,