Optimismo epistémico: en defensa de la objetividad en la ciencia

• Autores: Roberto Bueno Cuadra, Elizabeth Dany Araujo Robles
• Localización: Liberabit, ISSN 1729-4827, ISSN-e 2223-7666, Vol. 23, Nº. 2, 2017 (Ejemplar dedicado a: Julio - Diciembre), págs. 273-290
• Idioma: español
• DOI: 10.24265/liberabit.2017.v23n2.08
• Títulos paralelos:
  • Epistemic optimism: in defense of objectivity in science
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Dialnet Métricas: 3 Citas
• Resumen
  • español

    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

  • English

    The purpose of this paper is to carry out a defense of the objectivist stance before the insistent presence of constructivist and relativist epistemologies in psychology. For this, we critically examine some constructivist arguments and then we review the role of non-cognitive factors and researchers’ conceptual frameworks in constructing knowledge. We finalize with a brief account about rationality of scientific decision and the possibility of a progressive, not only substitute, development of scientific knowledge. We conclude that, contrary to claims of constructivists and relativists, it is indeed possible to create knowledge and there exists a way of true progress in it, all of which we call epistemic optimism.

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

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • 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...
  • 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 &...
  • 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...
  • 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...
  • 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...
  • Hicks, S., & Taylor, C. (2008). A complex terrain of words and deeds: Discourse, research, and social change. En P. Cox, T. Geisen &...
  • Isambert, F. A. (1985). Un «programme fort» en sociologie de la science?. A propose de plusieurs ouvrages de sociologie de la science. Revue...
  • 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...
  • 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...
  • 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...
  • 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...
  • Willig, C. (2013). Introducing qualitative research in psychology. Adventures in theory and method (3a. ed.). Maidenhead, RU: Open University...