Castaño Paola
School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University, Glamorgan Building, King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff, CF10 3WT United Kingdom.
Am Sociol. 2021;52(4):671-701. doi: 10.1007/s12108-021-09515-y. Epub 2021 Oct 30.
Based on a study of the International Space Station (ISS), this paper argues that - as a set of orientations for sociological inquiry - pragmatism and hermeneutics are confluent frameworks to examine valuation as a social process. This confluence is grounded on their common attunement to valuing as a problematic and relational process, their equally common updates with theories of institutions, and a further conceptual development regarding the temporalities of valuation. I advance the argument in four steps. First, looking at how the question about the "scientific value" of the ISS is far from settled, I show how valuation is always about something considered problematic and indeterminate. Second, characterizing the ISS at the intersection of different criteria of assessment, I stress the nature of valuation as a fundamentally perspectival and interpretive process, and show how a hermeneutic approach can complement some of the limitations of pragmatism in this regard. Third, I look at the question of institutions considering how some modes of assessment sediment more successfully than others. Fourth, I argue that, while providing insights towards it, pragmatist and hermeneutic approaches to valuation have not fully grasped its temporal nature as a process, and outline ways to open this line of inquiry. I conclude with some ideas for studies in sociology of science to re-entangle detailed case studies of scientific practice with the study of how institutions make claims of worth about the nature of science, I propose ways to extend these arguments to other studies of what I call , and I make some considerations about our stance as sociologists in these valuation disputes.
基于对国际空间站(ISS)的一项研究,本文认为,作为社会学探究的一组取向,实用主义和诠释学是用于审视作为一种社会过程的评估的融合性框架。这种融合基于它们对评估作为一个有问题的关系过程的共同调适、它们与制度理论同样常见的更新,以及关于评估时间性的进一步概念发展。我分四个步骤推进这一论点。首先,通过审视关于国际空间站“科学价值”的问题远未解决的情况,我展示评估总是围绕着被认为有问题和不确定的事物。其次,通过将国际空间站置于不同评估标准的交叉点来进行描述,我强调评估本质上是一个视角性和解释性的过程,并展示诠释学方法如何能够弥补实用主义在这方面的一些局限性。第三,我考虑制度问题,探究一些评估模式如何比其他模式更成功地沉淀下来。第四,我认为,虽然实用主义和诠释学的评估方法提供了相关见解,但它们尚未充分把握评估作为一个过程的时间本质,并概述了开启这一探究方向的方法。我通过一些关于科学社会学研究的想法来作结,这些想法旨在将科学实践的详细案例研究与关于制度如何对科学本质提出价值主张的研究重新联系起来,我提出将这些论点扩展到我所称的其他研究的方法,并对我们作为社会学家在这些评估争议中的立场进行了一些思考。