Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Downes / NEWOF
ECONOMICS
THE SOCIAL
OFSCIENCES
SCIENCE/ June 2001
Agents and Norms
in the New Economics of Science
STEPHEN M. DOWNES
University of Utah
In this article, the author focuses on Philip Kitcher’s and Alvin Goldman’s eco-
nomic models of the social character of scientific knowledge production. After
introducing some relevant methodological issues in the social sciences and char-
acterizing Kitcher’s and Goldman’s models, the author goes on to show that spe-
cial problems arise directly from the concept of an agent invoked in the models.
The author argues that the two distinct concepts of agents, borrowed from eco-
nomics and cognitive psychology, are inconsistent. Finally, the author discusses
some of the normative implications that arise from adopting economic concepts
of agents in the study of science.
1. NATURALIZED PHILOSOPHY
OF SCIENCE AND SCIENCE STUDIES
adopt at least two conceptions of agent in their work, drawn from two
different theoretical sources. They share with Giere a reliance on cog-
nitive science, and yet they also draw on neoclassical economics.
These contrasting theoretical resources for their naturalistic approaches
lead to some problematic tensions. In the next section, I turn to the dis-
cussion of agents as it occurs in the philosophy of social science,
which provides background for the assessment of Goldman’s and
Kitcher’s conception of agents that follows.
CONCLUSION
and Kitcher shouldn’t agree on the goal I have outlined. But currently
on my analysis their acceptance of the two inconsistent conceptions of
agents blocks the move toward this goal.
NOTES
REFERENCES
Bloor, D. 1991. Knowledge and social imagery. 2d ed. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Callebaut, W. 1993. Taking the naturalistic turn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Churchland, P. M. 1989. A neurocomputational perspective. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Downes, S. M. 1993. Socializing naturalized philosophy of science. Philosophy of Science
60:452-69.
Elster, J. 1989. Nuts and bolts for the social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Fine, A. 1996. Science made up. In The disunity of science, edited by P. Galison and D. Stump.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Fuller, S. 1988. Social epistemology. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.
. 1993. Philosophy of science and its discontents. 2d ed. London: Guilford.
Geertz, C. 1971. The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Giere, R. 1988. Explaining science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
, ed. 1991. Cognitive models of science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press.
Goldman, A. 1986. Epistemology and cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
. 1992. Liaisons: Philosophy meets the cognitive and social sciences. Cambridge: MIT
Press.
. 1994. Psychological, social, and epistemic factors in the theory of science. In
Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association, edited by D. Hull, M. Forbes, and
R. M. Burian, Vol. 2, 277-86. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.
Gopnik, A., and H. Welman. 1992. Why the child’s theory of mind really is a theory.
Mind and Language 7:145-71.
Hands, W. D. 1994. The sociology of scientific knowledge. In New Directions in Economic
Methodology, edited by R. Blackhouse, 75-106. London: Routledge.
Howson, C., and P. Urbach. 1989. Scientific reasoning: A Bayesian approach. LaSalle, IL:
Open Court.
Kahneman, D., P. Slovic, and A. Tversky, eds. 1982. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics
and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kim, J. 1994. What is “naturalized epistemology”? In Naturalizing epistemology, edited
by H. Kornblith, 2d ed., 33-56 Cambridge: MIT Press.
Kitcher, P. 1992. The naturalists’ return. Philosophical Review 101:53-114.
. 1993. The advancement of science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kornblith, H. 1994. Naturalizing epistemology. 2d ed. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Latour, B. 1987. Science in action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Little, D. 1991. Varieties of social explanation. Boulder, CO: Westview.
McClellan, C. 1996. The economic consequences of Bruno Latour. Social Epistemology
10:193-208.
Mirowski, P. 1996. The economic consequences of Philip Kitcher. Social Epistemology
10:153-69.
Rouse, J. 1996. Engaging science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.