Optimismo epistémico: en defensa de la objetividad en la ciencia

  • Roberto Bueno-Cuadra Universidad de San Martín de Porres, Perú
  • Elizabeth Dany Araujo-Robles Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Perú
Palabras clave: constructivismo, objetividad, paradigmas, relativismo, racionalidad científica, conocimiento cientifico

Resumen

El propósito de este trabajo es realizar una defensa de la posición objetivista frente a la insistente presencia de epistemologías constructivistas y relativistas en el campo de la psicología. Para cumplir este objetivo, examinamos críticamente algunos argumentos constructivistas y luego revisamos el papel de los factores no cognoscitivos y del marco conceptual del investigador en la construcción del conocimiento. Finalizamos con una breve discusión de la racionalidad en la decisión científica y de la posibilidad de un desarrollo progresivo, y no solo sustitutivo, del conocimiento científico. Nuestra conclusión es que, contrario a lo que sostienen constructivistas y relativistas, es posible generar conocimiento y que existe una línea real de progreso en el saber humano; a todo lo cual denominamos optimismo epistémico.

Doi: https://doi.org/10.24265/liberabit.2017.v23n2.08

Descargas

La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.

Citas

Agazzi, E. (2014). Scientific objectivity and its contexts. Nueva York: Springer.

Andersen, H., Barker, P., & Chen, X. (2006). The cognitive structure of scientific revolutions. Cambridge, RU: Cambridge University Press.

Baghramian, M. (2004). Relativism. Nueva York: Routledge.

Baggott, J. (1993). The meaning of quantum theory. A guide for students of chemistry and physics. Oxford, RU: Oxford University Press.

Boghossian, P. A. (2006). Fear of knowledge. Against relativism and constructivism. Oxford, RU: Oxford University Press.

Bohr, N. (1958). Atomic physics and human knowledge. Nueva York: Wiley.

Brown, J. R. (1994). Smoke and mirrors. How science reflects reality. Nueva York: Routledge.

Brown, J. R. (2001). Who rules in science. An opinionated guide to the wars. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Cole, S. (1992). Making science. Between nature and society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Cole, S. (1998). Voodoo sociology. Recent developments in the sociology of science. En P. R. Gross, N. Levitt & M. W. Lewis (Eds.), The flight from science and reason (pp. 274-287 (4ta. impresión). Nueva York: The New York Academy of Sciences.

Collier, A. (2003). In defence of objectivity and other essays. On realism, existentialism and politics. Londres: Routledge.

Corbetta, P. (2003). Social research. Theory, methods and techniques. Londres: Sage.

Daston, L., & Galison, P. (2007). Objectivity. Nueva York: Zone Books.

Einstein, A., & Infeld, L. (1986). La evolución de la física (publicación original de 1936). Barcelona: Salvat.

Elitzur, A. C. (2005). What is the measurement problem anyway? Introductory reflections of quantum puzzles. En A. C. Elitzur, S. Dolev & N. Kolenda (Eds.), Quo vadis quantum mechanics? (pp. 1-5). Nueva York: Springer. doi: 10.1007/3-540-26669-0_1

Feist, G. J. (2006). The psychology of science and the origins of the scientific method. Nueva Haven: Yale University Press.

Gergen, K. J. (1985). The social constructionist movement in modern psychology. American Psychologist, 40, 266-275. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.40.3.266

Green, J., & Thorogood, N. (2004). Qualitative methods for health research. Londres: Sage.

Hacking, I. (1995). The looping effect of human kinds. En D. Sperber, D. Premack & A. J. Premack (Eds.), Causal cognition: a multidisciplinary debate (pp. 351-383 y pp. 384-394). Oxford, RU: Clarendon. doi: 10.1093/ acprof:oso/9780198524021.003.0012

Haely, K. C. (2008). Objectivity in the feminist philosophy of science. Londres: Continuum International.

Hanson, N. R. (1971). Patrones de descubrimiento. Madrid: Alianza.

Harding, S. (1999). After the neutrality ideal: Science, politics, and «strong objectivity». En E. C. Polifroni & M. Welch (Eds.), Perspectives on philosophy of science in nursing: an historical and contemporary anthology (pp. 451-461). Filadelfia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.

Heisenberg, W. (1958). Physics and philosophy. The revolution in modern science. Nueva York: Harper & Brothers.

Hessen, B. (2009). The social and economic roots of Newton ́s Principia. En G. Freudenthal & P. McLaughlin (Eds.), The social and economic roots of the scientific revolution (pp. 41-101). Nueva York: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9604-4_2

Hicks, S., & Taylor, C. (2008). A complex terrain of words and deeds: Discourse, research, and social change. En P. Cox, T. Geisen & R. Green (Eds.), Qualitative research and social change. European contexts (pp. 52-72). Nueva York: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/ 9780230583962_4

Isambert, F. A. (1985). Un «programme fort» en sociologie de la science?. A propose de plusieurs ouvrages de sociologie de la science. Revue Française de Sociologie, 26(3), 485-508.

Kirk, R. (1999). Relativism and reality. A contemporary introduction. Londres: Routledge.

Kuhn, T. S. (1977). The essential tension. Selected studies in scientific tradition and change. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Lakatos, I. (1978). Philosophical papers. Vol. 1. Cambridge, RU: Cambridge University Press.

Laudan, L. (1977). Progress and its problems. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Longino, H. E. (1990). Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

MacKinnon, C. A. (1991). Toward a feminist theory of the state. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

McGrath, J. E., & Johnson, B. A. (2003). Methodology makes meaning: How both qualitative and quantitative paradigms shape evidence and its interpretation. En P. M. Camic, J. E. Rhodes, & L. Yardley, L. (Eds.) Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives in methodology and design, (pp. 31-48).
Washington: American Psychological Association. doi: 10.1037/10595-003

Méndez, E. (2000). El desarrollo de la ciencia. Un enfoque epistemológico. Espacio Abierto, 9, 505-534.

Norris, C. (2003). Quantum theory and the flight from realism. Philosophical responses to quantum mechanics. Nueva York: Routledge.

Ponterotto, J. G. (2005). Qualitative research in counseling psychology: a primer on research paradigms and philosophy of science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 126-136. doi: 10.1037/0022- 0167.52.2.126

Potter, E. (2006). Feminism and philosophy of science. An introduction. Londres: Routledge.

Rapport, N. (2004). From the porter’s point of view. In F. Rapport (Ed.), New qualitative methodologies in health and social care research (pp. 99-122). New York: Routledge.

Sceski, J. (2007). Popper, objectivity and the growth of knowledge. Nueva York: Continuum.

Searle, J. R. (1993). Rationality and realism, what is at stake? Daedalus, 122(4), 55-83.

Sokal, A., & Bricmont, J. (1999). Imposturas intelectuales. Barcelona: Paidós Ibérica.

Stanley, L. (Ed.) (2013). Feminist praxis. Research, theory and epistemology in feminist sociology. Londres: Routledge.

Vanderstoep, S. W., & Johnston, D. D. (2009). Research methods for everyday life. Building qualitative and quantitative approaches. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Willig, C. (2013). Introducing qualitative research in psychology. Adventures in theory and method (3a. ed.). Maidenhead, RU: Open University Press.
Publicado
2017-11-30
Sección
Artículos Teóricos