Epistemologia social

Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Centro de Filosofia e Ciencias Humanas, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Sociologia Política, Florianópolis, 2013Ao longo da segunda metade do século XX a questão da relevância de variáveis sociais no empreendimento científico, a dimensão social do conhecimento, aproximou os campos da sociologia e da filosofia. Muitas abordagens e interpretações foram produzidas. Alguns teóricos abordam características sociais inerentes ao campo científico, outros abordam características sociais atuantes na cognição dos cientistas e há grupos teóricos que enfatizam a relação entre a sociedade e a ciência. O presente trabalho tratará de duas propostas distintas de abordagens sobre a dimensão social do conhecimento, que partilham a reivindicação de uma mesma nomenclatura: #Epistemologia Social#. Propõe-se uma descrição geral da obra de dois autores: Steve Fuller e Alvin Goldman. Fuller apresenta uma proposta normativa de epistemologia social com orientação política. Sustentando as reivindicações dos trabalhos sociológicos no campo, ataca o trabalho normativo que a Filosofia da Ciência tradicionalmente tenta empreender. Para Fuller a dimensão empírica é essencial para o trabalho normativo. Adotando o construtivismo social e o relativismo epistêmico Fuller propõe uma nova forma de organizar a busca pelo conhecimento. Essa nova organização daria ênfase à distribuição do conhecimento para que a população pudesse intervir na direção do crescimento do conhecimento. Essa direção adotada de forma democrática, em um fórum público liberal, faria com que a produção do conhecimento atingisse a máxima eficiência para a sociedade. Goldman apresenta uma proposta verística de epistemologia social. Seu projeto se vincula à epistemologia primária. O autor empreende uma análise confiabilista da dimensão social do conhecimento, isto é, busca analisar qual o potencial das práticas sociais no processo de formação de crenças verdadeiras por parte dos indivíduos. Para tanto o autor se concentra na avaliação dos processos de testemunho e argumentação. A partir dos elementos destacados na inspeção minuciosa desses processos, podemos elaborar estratégias de intervenção em casos reais onde o objetivo é a obtenção de verdades. Diante da exposição dessas duas propostas observa-se que existem diferentes abordagens que orientam um estudo da dimensão social do conhecimento. Essas diferentes abordagens têm diferentes objetivos e diferentes pressupostos, que acarretam na escolha de diferentes itens para análise. Entretanto, essas divergências não fazem com que os projetos sejam necessariamente antagônicos.<br>Abstract : Throughout the second half of the twentieth century the inquiry on the relevance of social variables in the scientific enterprise, the social dimension of knowledge, has linked sociology and philosophy. Many approaches and interpretations were produced. Some theorists addressed social characteristics inherent in the scientific community, others addressed social characteristics of scientists´ cognition and other theorists emphasize the relationship between society and science. This work deal with two approaches to the social dimension of knowledge that claim the same nomenclature: "Social Epistemology." We propose a general description on the work of two authors: Steve Fuller and Alvin Goldman. Fuller presents a proposal of normative social epistemology with politics orientation. Fuller sustain claims of sociological work in the field that attack the normative work traditionally undertaken by Philosophy of Science. Fuller says that the empirical dimension is essential to the normative work. Adopting social constructivism and epistemic relativism, Fuller proposes a new way of organizing the search for knowledge. This new organization would emphasize the distribution of knowledge so that people could interfere in the direction of knowledge´s growth. This direction would be taken in a democratic way, in a liberal public forum, and make knowledge production reach maximum efficiency for society. Goldman presents a veristic approach to social epistemology. His project is linked to primary epistemology. Goldman undertakes a reliabilist analysis of the social dimension of knowledge, which seeks to analyze the potential of social practices in the process of forming true beliefs. The author focuses on the evaluation of our practices in testimony and argumentation. From the elements highlighted in this inspection, we can develop strategies to intervene in cases where the actual goal is to obtain true believes. Given the exposure of these two proposals we observe that there are different approaches that guide a study on the social dimension of knowledge. These different approaches have different goals and different assumptions, which lead to the choice of different items for analysis. However, this divergence does not make those projects necessarily opposite. Throughout the second half of the twentieth century the inquiry on the relevance of social variables in the scientific enterprise, the social dimension of knowledge, has linked sociology and philosophy. Many approaches and interpretations were produced. Some theorists addressed social characteristics inherent in the scientific community, others addressed social characteristics of scientists´ cognition and other theorists emphasize the relationship between society and science. This work deal with two approaches to the social dimension of knowledge that claim the same nomenclature: "Social Epistemology." We propose a general description on the work of two authors: Steve Fuller and Alvin Goldman. Fuller presents a proposal of normative social epistemology with politics orientation. Fuller sustain claims of sociological work in the field that attack the normative work traditionally undertaken by Philosophy of Science. Fuller says that the empirical dimension is essential to the normative work. Adopting social constructivism and epistemic relativism, Fuller proposes a new way of organizing the search for knowledge. This new organization would emphasize the distribution of knowledge so that people could interfere in the direction of knowledge´s growth. This direction would be taken in a democratic way, in a liberal public forum, and make knowledge production reach maximum efficiency for society. Goldman presents a veristic approch to social epistemology. His project is linked to primary epistemology. goldman undertakes a reliabilist analysis of the social dimension of knowledge, which seeks to analyze the potential of social practices in the process of forming true beliefs. The author focuses on the evaluation of our practices in testimony and argumentation. From the elements highlighted in this inspection, we can develop strategies to intervene in cases where the actual goal is to obtain true believes. Given the exposure of these two proposals we observe that there are different approaches that guide a study on the social dimension of knowledge. These different approaches have different goals and different assumptions, which lead to the choice of different items for analysis. However, this divergence does not make those projects necessarily opposite