Science Studies with Local Characteristics
A Dengist Attempt at Aggiornamento
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3986/fv.46.1.01Keywords:
epistemology, sociology of scientific knowledge, global turn, decolonizationAbstract
The article situates this special issue of Filozofski vestnik within the state of research in history and philosophy of science. On the one hand, it highlights the lack of translation of sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK) in Slovenian epistemology while, on the other hand, drawing attention to some unresolved problems of SSK that have been addressed by some recent trends in science studies, like the global turn and calls for decolonization. In the absence of coherent schools of thought, the aim of the issue is hence not to import “solutions from abroad,” but to update the discipline in Slovenia while simultaneously appraising the state of international research which should serve as the standard of this modernization, thus arriving at an epistemology with local characteristics. Three methodological shifts are outlined, which the articles in this issue develop in dialogue with established studies of science. First, they expand the geographical scope of case studies not just beyond the Global North, but also beyond the borders of the former British and French empires. Second, building on the principle of symmetry, the same approaches may and are productively used to analyze the conceptions of elite intellectuals, Yucatec housewives, Habsburg officials, Carniolan farmers, doctors, meteorologists, or members of the Yugoslav Federal Commission for Nuclear Energy. Thirdly, scientific practices are not treated merely as anthropological micro-objects, but are examined in connection with the specific power relations in which they unfold.
Downloads
References
Barnes, Barry, David Bloor in John Henry. Scientific Knowledge: A Sociological Analysis. London: Athlone Press, 1996.
Barry, Andrew. »The History of Measurement and the Engineers of Space«. The British Journal for the History of Science 26, št. 4 (1993): 459–68.
Bloor, David. »Anti-Latour«. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 30, št. 1 (1999): 81–112.
Bloor, David. Knowledge and Social Imagery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991.
Bloor, David. »Reply to Bruno Latour«. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 30, št. 1 (1999): 131–36.
Bourdieu, Pierre. Znanost o znanosti in reflektivnost. Ljubljana: Liberalna akademija, 2004.
Callon, Michel. »Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay«. The Sociological Review 32, št. 1 (1984): 196–233.
Collins, Harry. Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
Collins, Harry. »The Sociology of Scientific Knowledge: Studies of Contemporary Science«. Annual Review of Sociology 9 (1983): 265–85.
Collins, Harry, in Trevor Pinch. The Golem: What Everyone Should Know About Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Connelly, John. »Was the Habsburg Empire an Empire?« Austrian History Yearbook 54 (2023): 1–14.
Daston, Lorraine, in Peter Galison. Objectivity. New York: Zone Books, 2007.
Erjavec, Aleš, et al. »Okrogla miza: vprašanje razlage procesa oblikovanja znanstvenih teorij in konceptov v epistemologiji in filozofiji znanosti«. Vestnik 5, št. 1–2 (1984): 57–122.
Fages, Volny, Jérôme Lamy in Arnaud Saint-Martin. »Newton, les Sex Pistols et la pompe à air: l’histoire des sciences généraliste de Simon Schaffer (1/2)«. Zilsel (2014). Pridobljeno 7. 10. 2025. [https://zilsel.hypotheses.org/706](https://zilsel.hypotheses.org/706).
Foucault, Michel. »Kaj je avtor?«. Prevedla Vesna Maher. V: Vednost – oblast – subjekt, 39–60. Ljubljana: Krtina, 2008.
Galison, Peter. How Experiments End. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987.
Gingras, Yves. »Un air de radicalisme: Sur quelques tendances récentes en sociologie de la science et de la technologie«. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales 108, št. 3 (1995): 3–18.
Golinski, Jan. Making Natural Knowledge: Constructivism and the History of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005.
Gooday, Graeme. »Precision Measurement and the Genesis of Physics Teaching Laboratories in Victorian Britain«. British Journal for the History of Science 23, št. 1 (1990): 25–51.
Gooding, David, Trevor Pinch in Simon Schaffer, ur. The Uses of Experiment: Studies in the Natural Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Holton, Gerald. »Subelectrons, Presuppositions, and the Millikan-Ehrenhaft Dispute«. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 9, št. 2 (1978): 161–224.
Knorr-Cetina, Karin. »The Ethnographic Study of Scientific Work: Toward a Constructivist Interpretation of Science«. V: Science Observed, uredila Karin Knorr-Cetina in Mike Mulkay, 115–40. London: Sage, 1983.
Knorr-Cetina, Karin. The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. New York: Pergamon Press, 1981.
Komel, Svit. »Kanon in revolucija: vloga pojma znanstvene revolucije pri vzpostavitvi zgodovine znanosti kot discipline«. Filozofski vestnik 43, št. 1 (2022): 151–79.
Komel, Svit. »Praktična vednost in praktična vednost pravnih delavcev«. Problemi 61, št. 9–10 (2024): 159–93.
Kuhn, Thomas. »The Function of Measurement in Modern Physical Science«. Isis 52, št. 2 (1961): 161–93.
Latour, Bruno. »For David Bloor … and Beyond: A Reply to David Bloor’s ‘Anti-Latour’«. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 30, št. 1 (1999): 113–29.
Latour, Bruno. »Reply to John Stewart«. Radical Science Journal 12 (1982): 137–40.
Latour, Bruno. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987.
Latour, Bruno. »Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern«. Critical Inquiry 30, št. 2 (2004): 225–48.
Latour, Bruno, in Geof Bowker. »A Booming Discipline Short of Discipline: (Social) Studies of Science in France«. Social Studies of Science 17, št. 4 (1987): 715–48.
Latour, Bruno, in Steve Woolgar. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Druga izdaja. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986.
Lossin, R. H. »Neoliberalism for Polite Company: Bruno Latour’s Pseudo-Materialist Coup«. Salvage 7 (2020). Pridobljeno 7. 10. 2025. [https://salvage.zone/neoliberalism-for-polite-company-bruno-latours-pseudo-materialist-coup/](https://salvage.zone/neoliberalism-for-polite-company-bruno-latours-pseudo-materialist-coup/).
Lynch, Michael. Art and Artifact in Laboratory Science: A Study of Shop Work and Shop Talk in a Research Laboratory. London: Routledge, 1985.
Lynch, Michael. »Discipline and the Material Form of Images: An Analysis of Scientific Visibility«. Social Studies of Science 15, št. 1 (1985): 37–66.
MacKenzie, Donald. Knowing Machines: Essays on Technical Change. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996.
MacKenzie, Donald. »Marx and the Machine«. Technology and Culture 25, št. 3 (1984): 473–502.
MacKenzie, Donald. »Producing Accounts: Finitism, Technology and Rule-Following«. V: Knowledge as Social Order: Rethinking the Sociology of Barry Barnes, uredil Massimo Mazzotti, 99–118. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008.
Macfarlane, Alan. »Simon Schaffer: Three Interview Sessions From 27 June to 2 July 2008«. University of Cambridge, 13. 4. 2011. [https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/1130259/](https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/1130259/).
Mali, Franc. »Epistemološki izvori in problemi sodobne sociologije znanstvenega vedenja«. Časopis za kritiko znanosti 18, št. 132–33 (1990): 180–97.
Noys, Benjamin. »The Discreet Charm of Bruno Latour«. V: (Mis)readings of Marx in Continental Philosophy, uredila Jernej Habjan in Jessica White, 195–210. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2014.
O’Connell, John. »Metrology: The Creation of Universality by the Circulation of Particulars«. Social Studies of Science 23, št. 1 (1993): 129–73.
O’Gorman, Emily, in Andrea Gaynor. »More-Than-Human Histories«. Environmental History 25, št. 4 (2020): 711–35.
Omodeo, Pietro Daniel. Political Epistemology: The Problem of Ideology in Science Studies. Cham: Springer, 2019.
Peña-Guzmán, David M. »French Historical Epistemology: Discourse, Concepts, and the Norms of Rationality«. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 79 (2020): 68–76.
Pickering, Andrew. The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995.
Pickering, Andrew, ur. Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
Pinch, Trevor. Confronting Nature: The Sociology of Solar-Neutrino Detection. Lancaster: Dordrecht, 1986.
Raj, Kapil. Relocating Modern Science: Circulation and the Construction of Knowledge in South Asia and Europe, 1650–1900. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
Rheinberger, Hans-Jörg. »On the Historicity of Scientific Knowledge: Ludwik Fleck, Gaston Bachelard, Edmund Husserl«. V: Science and the Life-World: Essays on Husserl’s Crisis of European Sciences, uredila David Hyder in Hans-Jörg Rheinberger, 164–76. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010.
Schaffer, Simon. »Astronomers Mark Time: Discipline and the Personal Equation«. Science in Context 2, št. 1 (1988): 115–45.
Schaffer, Simon. »The Eighteenth Brumaire of Bruno Latour«. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 22, št. 1 (1991): 175–92.
Schaffer, Simon. From Physics to Anthropology and Back Again. Cambridge: Prickly Pear Press, 1994.
Secord, James A. »Knowledge in Transit«. Isis 95, št. 4 (2004): 654–72.
Secord, James A. »Late Victorian Metrology and Its Instrumentation: A Manufactory of Ohms«. V: Invisible Connections: Instruments, Institutions, and Science, uredila Robert Bud in Susan E. Cozzens, 23–56. Bellingham: SPIE Optical Engineering Press, 1992.
Secord, James A. »A Tradition from the Ancestors«. British Journal for the History of Science 58, št. 1 (2025): 399–422.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit their self to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
More in: Submission chapter
