Theory Integration And Paradigm Shift In The Sociology Of Knowledge:a Scientific Specialty Study Approach

Heretofore the studies of the sociology of knowledge (SK) could be classified into two parts:the reviews of the SK, and the studies of the concrete issues in the SK. Now the existing studies of the first part are various kinds of pectinations of the SK theories, these pectinations lack methodological awareness. Based on this, this thesis will take SK itself as "study object" and give it sociological analysis. The framework of this study originates from the pertinent theories of "specialty study" in the SK and the sociology of science. By summarizing and criticizing the specialty theories of Merton, Klein, Kuhn, Bourdieu, Whitley and Delanty, the point is raised that a specialty could be understood as a "logical-social cohesion". On the one hand, as a special way of knowing, scientific specialties evolve and accumulate in a way that different from the common-sense knowledge does. The particularity and autonomy of the scientific specialties are granted by the society. It is the social need for exact knowledge that determines that scientific specialties could gain their legitimacy and develop in their own way. In other words, the society dominates the specialty knowledge, and the specialty should carry out its cognitive process in accordance with the established social expectation to maintain its legitimacy. On the other hand, the legitimacy that scientific specialty knowledge can acquire social acknowledgment lies in that scientific specialties act on logical principles, which distinct from the generating principle of common-sense knowledge. It determines that the society dominates the scientific specialty knowledge in an indirect or hidden way. This dissertation holds that the endogenous principle of scientific specialty knowledge could be described as "logical as social" or "legitimacy as rationality". The given specialty evolves in the direction determined by the rationality of the cognition and consistency between the specialties and society.Based on the understandings above, this dissertation sees the SK as a unique specialty. As a specialty, the SK fits the general analytic framework of specialty study. As a special specialty, the SK’s uniqueness comes from the special object it has to face. As the SK itself is also one kind of knowledge, the study of the SK has to contain itself, means that if any interpretation of the SK wants to make sense, it has to be suitable to explain the SK knowledge, too. Thus the SK specialty has the reflexive character. Therefore, in the theoretical level, SK contains not only the theory of society-knowledge relationship, but also the investigation of the applicability of the theory to SK itself, which could be found in the sphere of sociological methodology. In the empirical level, the SK encapsulates not only the study of common-sense knowledge and culture, but also science and sociology itself. These multiple dimensions of the SK call for the integration of this specialty, which could be seen as a critical criterion of measuring whether the SK theory is reasonable or not.This thesis sees the integrated state of the knowledge system of the SK as a "paradigm", and summarizes two typical paradigms in the history of the SK:the paradigm of the social realism and the paradigm of the social constructivism. The social realism sees the society as an objective reality. It holds the dualistic perspective on the knowledge-society relationship, sees the society and knowledge as two distinct categories, and presupposes a reflective mode of interpretation. It also believes that scientific knowledge, including sociology, acts independently from the society, be immune to the social influence, and SK itself is also an autonomic specialty and is independent from society. On the contrary, the social constructivism sees the society as the externalization of individual’s subjective meanings. Society and knowledge are two sides of a coin, they have unitary relationship. It holds that scientific knowledge (including sociology) could not be immune to the sociological examination, because all kinds of knowledge are constructive, and SK should treat science and non-science impartially. The truth of the scientific knowledge could be found in the rational consensus of the society. It is also believed that SK itself is in a co-constructive relation with the whole social and cultural contexts, and as a specialty, SK’s autonomy is limited.Historically, the SK has undergone a paradigm shift from the social realism to the social constructivism. The momentum for this shift lies in the fact that the paradigm of the social realism could not solve the problem of reflexivity perfectly. The essence of the paradigm shift in the SK is that the inconsistency of the different dimensions of the SK seeks into consistency. To summarize, as a special specialty, the SK owns a specific rationality mode. In the cognitive level, the SK takes the theoretical integration and the paradigm shift as the core clue to understand and interpret its knowledge evolvement. In terms of morphology, the SK sees the latent tradition as the key component of the specialty, which co-exists and intertwines with the manifest tradition. At the same time, the SK specialty is not simply independent from the society, but is in a two-way constructive relationship with the entire social and cultural context.