| The sociology of science subfield can be divided into two different areas of critique. One area asserts that institutional forces within science create an atmosphere that makes objective analysis impossible. The second area is a microlevel analysis of the subjective way that humans create and maintain their personal concept of reality. Attempting to understand how these two subfields shape the construction of scientific knowledge is the purpose of this dissertation.;Weber's concept of elective affinity proves to be useful in explaining how the macro and micro epistemological forces interact with each other. This concept originally was created to explain how individuals became attracted to certain types of religious thought. However, this principle proves to be useful in the study of scientific institutions as well. Examination of this theoretical construct leads one to a sorting and matching hypothesis where individuals will be attracted to certain disciplines that complement their previously held personal perceptions of reality.;Data from a 1975 Ladd and Lipset study is examined to determine whether significant differences exist between worldviews of the disciplines. Political and religious measures are used as proxies for such worldviews. Furthermore, the field of sociology is examined to see if there is a unique paradigm in sociology that may disproportionately attract individuals from certain areas of society. These hypotheses are upheld. A philosophy of humanism appears to be a good description of the overarching paradigm that drives sociology. Furthermore, there is evidence that at least some of the sub-fields within the discipline of sociology act as sub-paradigms which develop their own unique interpretation of humanistic philosophy. Thus in order to appreciate the type of biases that influence a scientific discipline one must begin to understand what philosophical paradigm drives the scientific field. |
