Social scientists as technicians,advisors and meaning producers |
| |
Authors: | Nico Stehr Alexander Ruser |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Karl-Mannheim Chair for Cultural Studies, Zeppelin University, Am Seemooser Horn 20, Lake Constance, D-88045 Friedrichshafen, Germanynico.stehr@zu.de;3. Chair for Cultural Theory and Analysis, Zeppelin University, Am Seemooser Horn 20, Lake Constance, D-88045 Friedrichshafen, Germany |
| |
Abstract: | In this paper, we are addressing three issues that are at the core of scholarly reflections about the societal role of social science knowledge: (1) Social scientists tend to follow – although this is not always a deliberate choice – one of three models that describe their role as the producers of practical knowledge. For the sake of simplicity we have called the three models the “model of the technician”, the “model of the advisor” and the “model of the meaning producer”. (2) Due to the need for social inquiry to adopt a particular, restrictive perspective of its domain, useful knowledge is a complicated matter. Hence the need to put into question a widely supported notion at least among social scientists: When asked about the reasons for the limited “power” of social science knowledge the response frequently is that the adequacy and practical usefulness of social science knowledge is a function of its capturing the full complexity of what indeed are complex social phenomena. (3) Social scientists often tend to lament the marginal impact their intellectual efforts have on society, and they look with great envy across the divide of the so-called two cultures, wondering how and when they will be able to achieve the same kind of success and prestige the natural sciences and technology appear to enjoy in most societies. However, this unhappy view systematically understates the actual power of social science knowledge, in particular its role as a mind maker or meaning producer. |
| |
Keywords: | sociology of knowledge capability approach expertise |
|
|