Can Hasok Chang’s activist realism realistically allow a permanent incompatible pluralism?
Is Chang’s ideal of a resolutely pluralist science realistically achievable? Could human beings realistically characterized happily live with, or even tolerate, a science encompassing an abundance of incommensurable systems of practice, including some descriptive or ontological mutual contradictions...
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Sprache: | Français |
| Veröffentlicht: |
2026
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online Zugang: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Zusammenfassung: | Is Chang’s ideal of a resolutely pluralist science realistically achievable? Could human beings realistically characterized happily live with, or even tolerate, a science encompassing an abundance of incommensurable systems of practice, including some descriptive or ontological mutual contradictions and some partially incompatible conceptions of science? Could they remain effective as knowledge-producers under such conditions? In short, can Chang’s activist realism realistically allow a permanent, incompatible pluralism? These are the questions explored in this article. Globally, I will provide an affirmative answer to them. I will argue, however, that achieving such a state would require a profound transformation of both epistemic agents as we know them and of science as we know it. This transformation could be brought about by science education, but would then require an equally profound transformation of science education as we know it. |
|---|