Reply to comment

We have finally arrived (just in time for spring break!) at the radical
heart of this course: the insistence that good science must attend to its
social contexts, that the enterprise of the natural sciences must be treated, in theory as
it is in fact, as part of the social sciences. What are your reactions
to these claims? What is your response (for instance) to the
psychoanalytic move Keller makes @ the end of her essay, in claiming that
physicists' attachment to objectifiability is evidence of their "immature
magical thinking"? What do you think of Harding's argument that
scientists' ignorance of the social dimensions of their work is
"pornographic," "incompetent" and "deeply irrational"? Be concrete in
giving reasons for your responses: what social dimensions (for example)
have you observed among the practices of your own discipline?