ABSTRACT

The rejection of OC1-7 is guided by a variety of philosophical worries and impulses. Most importantly, relativists about science argue that scientific knowledge, like all knowledge, is inevitably informed by our all too local human perspectives and since we cannot step out of our cultural or conceptual frameworks and study the world as it is, the claims to universality or objectivity of science could not be justified. Furthermore, they point out that different historical epochs and cultures produce different standards and paradigms of rationality and correct reasoning, and hence no ahistorical criterion of adjudication between these differing perspectives is available. Relativism about science is also frequently motivated by a mistrust of the political and economic effects of science. Science is seen as a repressive institution which serves the interests of the dominant economic and cultural groupings and marginalizes dissenting views, particularly those of women and non-Western people. In recent decades relativistic views of science have been advanced and defended by sociologists of science, some feminist epistemologists and postmodernists.