Retórica y control social en el gran debate sobre los embriones

Sin resume

On SSK and Conversing with Scientists:Eugénia Rodrigues Talks with Michael J. Mulkay

Mike Mulkay takes Eugénia Rodrigues through a journey that revisits his involvement in the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge and STS. They talk dates, career moves, foundational work, books, and how it all started with a denied visa application from the US. Running under this formalistic level, though, other themes emerge: the notion of a “field” and its meaning in STS; the observed lack of epistemological and methodological rigor in research practice; Mulkay’s unsuccessful (on his own account) project on the literary forms or his unfazed take on the work produced by the “Edinburgh School.” It is a fascinating expedition and one that reveals some very present-day questions for STS, not least about the meanings of engagement and reflexivity. A reflection by Eugénia Rodrigues follows the interview

The universal values of science and China’s Nobel Prize pursuit

China does not seem to believe the existence of universally acknowledged values in science and fails to promote the observation of such values that also should be applied to every member of the scientific community and at all times. Or, there is a separation between the practice of science in China and the values represented by modern science. In this context, science, including the pursuit of the Nobel Prize, is more a pragmatic means to achieve the end of the political leadership – the national pride in this case – than an institution laden with values that govern its practices. However, it is the recognition and respect of the latter that could lead to achievement of the former, rather than the other way around

Environmentalism, pre-environmentalism, and public policy

In the last decade, thousands of new grassroots groups have formed to oppose environmental pollution on the basis that it endangers their health. These groups have revitalized the environmental movement and enlarged its membership well beyond the middle class. Scientists, however, have been unable to corroborate these groups' claims that exposure to pollutants has caused their diseases. For policy analysts this situation appears to pose a choice between democracy and science. It needn't. Instead of evaluating the grassroots groups from the perspective of science, it is possible to evaluate science from the perspective of environmentalism. This paper argues that environmental epidemiology reflects ‘pre-environmentalist’ assumptions about nature and that new ideas about nature advanced by the environmental movement could change the way scientists collect and interpret data.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/45449/1/11077_2005_Article_BF01006494.pd