IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jhisec/v23y2001i02p277-282_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Making Economic Knowledge: Reflections on Golinski's Constructivist History of Science

Author

Listed:
  • Weintraub, E. Roy

Abstract

While most scientists and philosophers of science privilege scientific knowledge, and have sought demarcations of science from non-science to justify the privilege, sociologists of science, small numbers of philosophers of science, anthropologists, and some scientists themselves have been attracted to a new way of talking about science. Prefigured by Ludwik Fleck (1935/1979) and Gaston Bachelard (1934/1984), nurtured by the controversies over Thomas Kuhn's work, and instantiated in the Edinburgh School's Strong Program, the naturalistic turn portrays science as a human activity, part of the woof and warp of culture itself. Yet curiously historians of science have been less involved in this recent reconceptualization of both science and scientific knowledge.

Suggested Citation

  • Weintraub, E. Roy, 2001. "Making Economic Knowledge: Reflections on Golinski's Constructivist History of Science," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 277-282, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jhisec:v:23:y:2001:i:02:p:277-282_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1053837200006933/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yefimov, V. M., 2015. "Two Disputes of Methods Three Constructivisms and Three Liberalisms. Part I," R-Economy, Ural Federal University, Graduate School of Economics and Management, vol. 1(1), pages 24-33.
    2. Vladiir Yefimov, 2015. "Two Diputes of Methods, Three Constructivisms, and Three Liberalisms. Part II," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(2), pages 72-85.
    3. Yefimov, V. M., 2015. "Two Diputes of Methods, Three Constructivisms, and Three Liberalisms. Part II," R-Economy, Ural Federal University, Graduate School of Economics and Management, vol. 1(2), pages 226-238.
    4. A. Maltsev., 2015. "History of Economic Thought, Quo vadis?," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 3.
    5. Vladiir Yefimov, 2015. "Two Disputes Of Methods, Three Constructivisms, And Three Liberalisms. Part I," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(1), pages 29-38.
    6. Yefimov, Vladimir, 2014. "Two disputes of methods, three constructivisms, and three liberalisms," MPRA Paper 56499, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jhisec:v:23:y:2001:i:02:p:277-282_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/het .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.