Methodology of social sciences and humanities in the era of populist science denialism

On the occasion of Nina Kulenović’s book “The concept of culture between individualism and holism

Authors

  • Miloš Milenković Department of Ethnology and Anthropology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Belgrade

Keywords:

populism, science denialism, methodology of social science, anthropology of science, science studies

Abstract

Populism manifests itself in various ways, one of which is the science denialism to which anthropology of science and interdisciplinary studies of science have inwittingly made significant contributions. Inspired by Nina Kulenović’s outstanding book, I discuss the importance of social science methodology and the politics of knowledge in the humanities at a time when science is  struggling to regain its authority in society. Analyzing the ideological origins of methodological choices can help us reverse engineer academic self-esteem. This would encourage us to engage in counter-counter-enlightenment efforts to suppress populist science denialism using critical-analytical tools that were once taken from us, trivialized, and then used against ourselves, yet to preserve those tools for didactic purposes. Only if methodology returns to its original normative-didactic character, it can have a feedback effect on politics.

References

Agassi, Joseph. 2003. Science and culture. Dordrecht: Springer.

Bloor, David. 1976. Knowledge and Social Imagery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Chapman, Roger ed. 2015. Culture wars: an encyclopedia of issues, viewpoints and voices. Armonk and London: M.E.Sharp.

Fassin, D. (2021). Of Plots and Men. Current Anthropology, 62(2), 128–137.

Goldman, Steven L. 2021. Science Wars: The Battle over Knowledge and Reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hansson, Sven Ove, “Science and Pseudo-Science”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/pseudo-science/>.

Hansson, Sven Ove. 2013. “Defining pseudoscience – and science”. In: Massimo Pigliucci and Maarten Boudry eds. The Philosophy of Pseudoscience. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 61–77.

Hansson, Sven Ove. 2016. “Science and non-science”. In: Paul Humphreys ed. The Oxford

Handbook of Philosophy of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 485–505.

Hansson, Sven Ove. 2018. “How connected are the major forms of irrationality? An analysis of pseudoscience, science denial, fact resistance and alternative facts”, Mètode Science Study Journal 8: 125–131.

Hansson, Sven Ove. 2020. “Social constructivism and climate science denial”. European Journal for Philosophy of Science 10. 37.

Harambam, Jaron. 2020. The corona truth wars: Where have all the STS’ers gone when we need them most? Science and Technology Studies 33(4): 60–67.

Hess, David J. 1997. Science Studies: An Advanced Introduction. New York and London: New York University Press.

Jarvie, Ian. 2016. “Popper’s Philosophy and the Methodology of Social Science”. In: Jeremy Shearmur and Geoffrey Stokes eds. The Cambridge Companion to Popper. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 284–317.

Jarvie, Ian. 2022. “The Persistence of the Individualism Debate Today”. In: Petr Skalnik ed. Ernest Gellner’s Legacy and Social Theory Today. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 53–74.

Jasanoff, Sheila ed. 1995. Handbook of science and technology studies. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Jensen, Casper Bruun. 2020. Disciplinary translations: Latour in literary studies and anthropology. Common Knowledge 26(2): 230–250.

Knorr-Cetina, Karen. 1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Kulenović, Nina. 2014. Metodološki individualizam nasuprot metodološkom holizmu. Istorijska pozadina, relevantnost i implikacije (nerešive?) rasprave u sporu oko eksplanatornog kapaciteta i naučnog statusa sociokulturne antropologije. Etnoantropološki problemi 9(2): 310–333.

Kulenović, Nina. 2015. Da li je antropologija „naučna“ ili „istorijska“ disciplina? Pouke iz povesti rane američke antropologije. Antropologija 15(2): 47–85.

Kulenović, Nina. 2016. Objašnjenje u antropologiji: istorijski kontekst, (Biblioteka Etnoantropološki problemi, Monografije, knj. 4). Beograd: Filozofski fakultet, Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju, Centar za antropologiju javnih i praktičnih politika: Dosije studio.

Kulenović, Nina. 2017. Objašnjenje u antropologiji: polemike, (Biblioteka Etnoantropološki problemi, Monografije, knj. 5). Beograd: Univerzitet, Filozofski fakultet, Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju, Centar za antropologiju javnih i praktičnih politika: Dosije studio.

Kulenović, Nina. 2019. Koncept kulture između prosvetiteljstva i kontraprosvetiteljstva.

Etnoantropološki problemi 14(1): 137–167.

Kulenović, Nina. 2021. Koncept kulture između individualizma i holizma: Pogled iz prosvetiteljsko-kontraprosvetiteljskog spora. Beograd: Filozofski fakultet i Dosije Studio.

Latour, Bruno. (1987). Science in Action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Latour, Bruno. And Steve, Woolgar. 1979. Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts.

Mazzarella, William. 2019. The anthropology of populism: beyond the liberal settlement. Annual Review of Anthropology 48(1): 45–60.

Milenković, Miloš. 2010. Istorija postmoderne antropologije: Posle postmodernizma. Beograd: Filozofski fakultet i Srpski genealoški centar.

Pišev, Marko. 2018. Islam, relativizam i nauka. Beograd: Filozofski fakultet i Dosije studio.

Pribićević, Ognjen. 2022. „Tramp, Džonson i Novi primitivizam – Pojavni oblici i uzroci velike krize u SAD i UK“. Etnoantropološki Problemi 17(1):327–348.

Ruser, Alexander. 2021 “Hijacking the Postmodern Project: Post-Truth and the Need to De-politicize Epistemological Dispute.” Social Epistemology, 1–10.

van Boven, Theodor. 2020. Populism and universal human rights law. In: Jure Vidmar (ed.) European populism and human rights. Leiden: Brill/Nijhoff, 29–51.

Žikić, Bojan. 2022. „Одбијање вакцинације против ковида-19 у Србији као пример социјалног солипсизма“. Etnoantropološki Problemi 17(1):233–257

Downloads

Published

2022-12-31

How to Cite

Milenković, M. (2022). Methodology of social sciences and humanities in the era of populist science denialism : On the occasion of Nina Kulenović’s book “The concept of culture between individualism and holism. Anthropology, 22(3), 9–19. Retrieved from https://www.antropologija.com/index.php/an/article/view/112

Issue

Vol. 22 No. 3 (2022): Anthropology

Section

Original scientific paper

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>