Objectivities in Print
Objectivities in Print
复制标题
印刷品的客观性
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
A. Csiszar
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Csiszar
自世纪后期以来，科学观察家们已经认识到，与科学客观性有关的一些做法与科学出版机构之间存在着密切的联系。这种联系似乎是如此引人注目，以至于人们普遍认为它存在很长时间，甚至是现代科学本身出现的先决条件。但这种信念既是历史错误的，也是错误的。本文追踪了科学出版与某些认识美德之间的联系正在形成的两个时刻。第一个时刻是关于世纪早期英国科学界裁判制度的传播，这种做法后来转变为我们现在所说的同行评议。第二个问题涉及到19世纪后期期刊文献作为集体科学观点所在地的巩固，与此同时，科学的客观性通常被视为这种集体观点的理性协调所固有的。
Since the late nineteenth century, observers of science have recognized a close link between several of the practices associated with scientific objectivity and the apparatus of scientific publishing. So compelling has seemed this link that it is commonly believed to be of very long standing, and even a precondition for the emergence of modern science itself. But this belief is both historically mistaken and philosophically misleading. This essay tracks two moments during which the bond between scientific publishing and certain epistemic virtues were in the process of formation. The first moment concerns the spread of referee systems in British science in the early nineteenth century, practices that were later transformed into what we now call peer review. The second concerns the late nineteenth-century consolidation of the periodical literature as the seat of collective scientific opinion at the same time that objectivity in science came commonly to be viewed as inhering in the rational coordination of such collective opinions.