米国文化史を専門とする、University of KansasのJeffrey P. Moran准教授は、進化論と創造論の戦いを記した著書"American Genesis"で、STSについて、次のように書いている。
The creationist criticism that Dawkins and his fellow scientists cannot see through the blinkers of their own secularism has found unlikely support from inside the academy, where the field of science and technology studies (STS) often echoes the antievolutionists' charges that scientific inquiry is inherently value-laden; scientific "truths", STS scholars argue, are not so much revelations of objective reality as they are propositions the scientific community has agreed to hold as true.[33] "Scientific truth" is therefore demoted to the status of a social construction, and as such, it is irremediably shaped by the social and political context in which they work. Typically coming from the academic left, STS scholars have tended to focus on the way in which assumptions about gender, race, and other issues affect the practice of science, but their approach allows room for other challenges to scientific authority. (p.132)


[33] David L Hull: "Science as Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Coneptual Development of Science (Chicago, 1988); Noretta Koertage ,ed: "A House Built on Sand: Exposing Postmoderninst Myths About Science (Oxford 1998); Norman Levitt and Paul R. Gross: "Hight Superstition: The Academic Left and its Quarrels with Science (Baltimore 1994).

[Jeffrey P. Moran: "American Genesis: The Evolution Controversies from Scopes to Creation Science", Oxford University Press, 2012]

While most creationists simply charge evolutionists with being irreligious or antireligious, a small number of sophisticated critics, such as Johnson, employ STS insights to criticize the naturalistic assumptions that evolutionary scientists make, maintaining that their irreligion leads them to seek only naturalistic explanations for phenomena such as speciation or the functionality of eyeball. One prominent STS scholar, Steve Fuller, from Warwick University in the United Kingdom, created a stir when he placed his expertise at the service of the school board in the Dover trial. Fuller testified that the scientific community used the requirement of naturalistic explanations primarily to reinforce its professional boundaries against potentially threatening competitors.(pp. 132-133)

ほとんどの創造論者は、単に無宗教や反宗教であると進化論者を非難するが、このようなPhillip Johnsonなどの洗練された少数の批判者たちは、STSの洞察を使って、「種形成や眼球の機能のような現象に、自然主義的説明のみを探求することにつながる無宗教を維持する、進化科学者が作った自然主義的仮定」を批判した。英国Warwick Universityの有名なSTS学者Steve Fullerは、Dover裁判[Kitzmiller et al v. Dover Area School District et al(2005)]で、学区教育委員会側から専門家証言を行って、波紋を投げかけた。Steve Fullerは、潜在的脅威な競合者を排除するために、科学界は自然主義的説明の義務付けていると証言した。
Steve Fullerは"超自然に言及しない"という科学の原則もまた、相対化の対象だと主張した。それはインテリジェントデザイン運動家たちの主張そのものを繰り返すものだった。
If scientific naturalism is primarily a product of community agreement, as STS implies, then it may also be more fragile than commonly believed, more vulnerable to criticism and rapid change. Johnson and his fellows look particularly to a founding document of STS, Thomas Kuhn's influential The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, which was published one year after The Genesis Flood, to support their argument that social constructions in the sciences -- in this case, the naturalistic methodology that underpins modern science -- are open to "paradigm shift" in Kuhnian language. As Johnson paraphrases Kuhn, a paradigm "is not a mere theory or hypothesis but a way of looking at the world that is influenced by cultural prejudice as well as by scientific observation and experience.[35] Fuller echoed the charge:; "I really think methodological naturalism is just a fig leaf for metaphysical naturalism when it gets right down to it."[36] (p. 133)

STSが意味するように科学的自然主義が、まずもってコミュニティの合意の産物であるなら、一般に考えられているより脆弱であり、批判や急激な変化に対してより壊れやすいものかもしれないPhillip Johnsonと仲間たちは、"Genesis Flood"の翌年に出版された、STSの基本文献であり、Thomas Kuhnの影響力の大きな著作である、"The Structure of Scientific Revolutions"(科学革命の構造)を見て、科学の社会的構造、この場合は近代科学を支える自然主義的方法がKuhnのいうところのパラダイムシフトに開かれているものだという自分たちの主張を支持するものだと考えた。Phillip JohnsonはKuhnの言葉を言い換えたように、パラダイムは「理論や仮説にすぎないものではなく、科学的観測や実験と同様に、文化的偏見に影響された世界観」である。Steve Fullerはこの告発を繰り返した。「詰まるところ、方法論的自然主義は、形而上学的自然主義を隠すイチジクの葉にすぎないと、私は本当に思う。」

[34] Tummy Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District et al, 400 F, Supp 2d 707 (M.D. Pa 2005),
October 24 morning
[35] Phillp E. Johnson: "Darwin on Trial", Downers Grove, 1993 p.86
[36] Testimony in Kizmiller
Before his death in 1996, Kuhn came to criticize some of the more radically relativistic uses of his theory, and surely he and most STS specialists did not intend their social constructionism to be placed at the service of creationism. Their ideas have nevertheless nurtured a spark of hope in the ID community. Although it is ironic for these Christian conservatives, who are committed to absolute standards of morality and truth, to dabble in postmodern relativism, the STS approach nevertheless has helpfully reinforced their attempts to demote science from its privileged postion as a neutral arbiter of truth. Then why should it take precedence over ID or other forms of creation science?

Johnson and his ID allies, however, misread Kuhn and other scholars in his tradition. The "paradigm shifts" Kuhn sees in the transition from Ptolemaic astronomy to Copernican, for example, or from Newtonian physics to Einstein's relativity, have been revolutions within the context of scientific naturalism. ID's attack on scientific naturalism, however, is of different order, as it seeks to do away not just with the Darwinian mechanism of natural selection but also with the naturalistic context of scientific proof altogether. (pp.133-144)


Phillip Johnsonとインテリジェントデザインの同盟者たちは、Kuhnとその伝統を受け継ぐ学者たちの主張を読み違えた。Kuhnが、プトレマイオス天文学からコペルニクス天文学への遷移や、ニュートン物理からアインシュタイン相対性理論への遷移に見た「パラダイムシフト」は、科学的自然主義のコンテキストの範疇内での革命だった。しかしながら、インテリジェントデザイン運動の科学的自然主義への攻撃は別次元のものだ。彼らは、ダーウィンの自然選択のメカニズムだけではなく、科学的証明の自然主義コンテキストそのものも粉砕しようとしている。
この点が重要なところ。STS学者Steve Fullerは方法論的自然主義を拒否している。そして、その点についてSTS学者からの批判は特に見当たらない。STS界隈では、「科学的証明の自然主義コンテキスト」あるいは方法論的自然主義もまた、科学の背後にある価値観・社会がたまたま持っているものであり、価値観・社会が変われば消え去ってしまうかもしれなものだと、見なされているのかもしれない。
posted by Kumicit at 2013/06/04 23:44 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | ID: General | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



コメント: [必須入力]