der Geist

“Statistics includes without distinction all individual cases, the individual circumstances which may have played some part in producing the phenomenon cancel each other out consequently do not contribute to determining the nature of the phenomenon. … The origin of our disagreement is elsewhere. It stems above all from the fact that I believe in science whereas Mr. Tardedoes not … Here, indeterminacy is made into a principle.”(Émile Durkheim)

“The impersonal, collective character is the product rather than the producer of the infinitely numerous individual characters…Everything is individual monad, which is a representation of a whole set of other elements connected to it.”(Gabriel Tarde)

“Structure is what is imagined to fill the gaps when there is a deficit of information. …The very heart of social phenomena is quantifiable because individual monads are constantly evaluating one another in simultaneous attempts to expand and to stabilize their worlds.”(Bruno Latour)

설령 대중이 무엇을 원하는지 안다고 할지라도, 왜 그것을 욕망하는지 모른다면 시류에 편승할 수밖에 없다. 그래서일까, 학술에서 영리로 옮겨간 이유가.

경비업체는 유사시 사설용병이 아닌가.

1. 소크라테스는 논박술과 산파술을 통해 아테네인들이 당연하게 생각하던 오래된 관습과 문화에 대해 재고할 것을 촉구하였다.

2. 소크라테스는 사회를 움직이는 참된 원인이 실재하며, 인간이 궁극적으로 추구해야 할 목표는 영혼의 탁월함이라 주장하였다.

1. “종래의 네트워크 분석은 주로 사회적 행위자들 간의 관계를 연결망으로 제시하고 그 조직의 구성이나 권력 관계를 살펴봄으로써 전형적인 사회적 행위를 추론하는 방편으로 이용되어 왔다. … 기존의 통례에서 더 나아가, 인터넷 상에서 황우석을 지지한 사람들의 담론을 분석하는데 네트워크 방법론을 새롭게 활용한다.”

2. “내용분석의 연장선상에서 … 핵심어들 간의 관계와 그 관계성 속에서 발현되는 구조적 특징을 살펴보기 위해 네트워크 분석을 활용한다. 그리하여 양적 연구와 질적 연구의 경계에서 ‘대상’과 ‘욕망’의 관계성을 중심으로 황우석 사태에서 대중들이 투영한 과학 담론의 의미를 새롭게 해석하는데 기여하고자 한다.”

3. 의미망 분석 시 “결점(node)으로 표현된 핵심어들 간의 관계를 컴퓨터 그래픽으로 나타내고 그 구조적 특징을 수학적으로 계산하는 네트워크 분석 소프트웨어인 파옉(PAJEK)”을 이용하였고, “인접중앙성(closeness centrality)에 따라 주요 결점들이 지도 중심부에 놓이도록 설계된 카마다-카와이 모델(Kamada & Kawai Model)을 적용”하였다.

4. “이질적이고 다원적인 개념 간의 상호연결을 통한 자기설명성(self-referentiality)의 확장 여지를 인지 가능한 수준으로 제한하기 위해 네트워크 분석에서 최적화된 블록 모델링(block modeling) 기법을 적용했을 때, 각 핵심어들은 구조적으로 동일한 연결 형태(structural equivalence)를 가진 그룹끼리 같은 색으로 표현된다.”

5. 의미망 분석(Semantic Network Analysis)은 내용분석(Content Analysis)에 연결망 분석(Social Network Analysis)을 도입하여 구조와 행위, 양방과 질방의 통합을 시도한다. 종단과 횡단을 모두 포섭하는 총체적 접근(Holistic Approach)은 가능한가.

생존이 죽음인 역설. 죽지 않으려 할수록 죽어가는 영혼.

“Through the sphere of institution and culture actors access to resources.”(L. Kim, 2007: 17)

* It’s a good try, but one-dimensional assumption irrelevant to ontology.

Unification, Education & Sociology, SNA, Critical Realism and Vision

What is science?

The ways of understanding science are and have been very different through history.

Could you explain these changes in the ways of understanding science?

The major change has been around the boundaries of science: around the notion of internalism and externalism. … It is not at all clear why theology has been judged “internal” to the sciences and economics “external” to the sciences. Definitions of the boundaries of the sciences therefore become profound historical problems.

Have there been more changes?

Yes. Now we are interested in objects and bodies as well as ideas and minds. To put it simply, we are interested in rebuilding history of science through or from those things previously forgotten or ignored … And finally, and quite the most interesting for me, we are less interested in older questions such as “who came first”, but instead in explaining how and why people get to agree to accept a knowledge. Until relatively recently, controversy seemed embarrassing as a subject of study. And now it’s seen to be very informative. We are interested in what happens when people fight, since then their assumptions become much more visible.

What do you mean by that?

If the world is the same everywhere, then we always ought to agree about its contents and behaviour. And when we don’t that’s embarrassing. But what if difference is intrinsic? In that case, one would expect disagreement, and what would need explanation would be agreement. The main change in history of science in my lifetime is that we have moved from explaining difference to explaining agreement.

And where does this change of approach come from?

In many ways it comes from sociology of science. Sociology tries to explain social order. So sociologists of science insist that order needs explanation - that it is not natural nor inevitable - and that solutions to the problem of knowledge, that is “how do I come to agree with you”, are solutions to the problem of social order, that is “how do we get to live together”. Sociology of science is, thus, an indispensible resource for understanding agreement.

What has this new perspective apported to the history of science?

Sociology of scientific knowledge offers a series of challenges and provocations to history of science. There is a valuable struggle in which different groups of scholars are constantly provoking each other with challenges, responses and debates.

What kind of struggle?

One example: sociology of scientific knowledge claims that once a controversy was over it is extremely difficult to see how the controversy has been closed. What should be studied, they argue, is what they call “Science in Action”, to take the opportunity of seeing the process by which the agreement is reached. That is a provocation to historians because we write about people who are dead and about controversies that are closed.

And is it worth such a fight?

I think that the function of the history of science is to make things that are familiar seem strange and things that are strange seem familiar. The aim is to make it look odd or strange so as to be able to examine the assumptions we are making that are invisible or apparently unremarkable. One way of achieving this end is to provoke. Provocation helps call up for examination material that we might to take for granted and that would otherwise be unnoticed.

What can history of science offer to the society?

We face a number of crises in the modern world. These are crisis of authority, of trust. And without understanding how we got to where we are, we are very unlikely to make informed decisions. So one of the things that historians of science can offer the social world is a more reliable memory and resources to help citizens take part in the most urgent debates about planning the future. Historians of science study how processes to reach an accord work. As a great social scientist once said, “if you forget the past, you are condemned to repeat it”.

* Simon Schaffer is professor of history and philosophy of science at the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at Cambridge University.

“우리나라 사교육 시장은 지난해 기준으로 40조 4313억원에 이른다. 월 평균 사교육비는 유치원생 29만 1500원, 초등학생 42만 8000원, 중학생 56만 8200원, 고등학생 65만 9500원이다. … OECD 회원국 중고등학생들 대상으로 청소년 행복지수를 조사했더니 우리나라는 삶에 만족하느냐는 질문에 53.9%만 그렇다고 답변했다. 네덜란드는 94.2%, 핀란드는 91.6%, 전체 평균은 84.8%였다.”