Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T00:33:29.715Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Science and Modern Politics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

André Philippart
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

FOR CONVENIENCE, I HAVE CHOSEN THE CONCEPT ‘SCIENCE’, ALTHOUGH the phrase ‘science policy’ would have expressed more clearly the relationship between scientific activity and its political causes and effects. The term ‘science’ is generally taken as free of any axiological or ontological value. The ‘liberal’ tradition assigns it an objective and neutral character, a point of view defended for instance by Karl Popper and Michael Polanyi whose search for truth and scientific work is situated above the political or ideological planes. Marxist ideology, however, places science on the level of beliefs, thus perpetuating 19th century ‘scientism’ and the vast positivist movement which, in a teleological way, bases the hope of a solution to all human problems on the development of science. ‘Objective Science’, ‘Scientism’, ‘Scientific Socialism’ are brand labels. But in all political systems, the combination of ideologies and of the resources created through scientific research confers a symbolic value upon science: that of the final means by which humanity will be saved or which will trigger off the ultimate catastrophe.

Type
Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , 01 October 1975 , pp. 473 - 493
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Popper, Karl R., La logique de la découverte, Paris, Payot, 1973 Google Scholar, pp. 49 and ff.

2 Popper, op. cit., pp. 41–2.

3 A Small Catechism for the Underclass, 1884/1885, quoted by L. Dencik, Scientific Research and Politics, Lund, 1971, p. 8.

4 Russell, Bertrand, The Impact of Science on Society, New York, Columbia University Press, 1951 Google Scholar, p. 145.

5 Final report, Dakar 21–30 January, 1974, Unesco, SC/MD/4O, 12 April 1974, see pp. 10–12 (General Declaration of Dakar).

6 Popper, K., op. cit; Polanyi, M., ‘The Republic of Science: its Political and Economic Theory’, Minerva, I, 1, Autumn 1962, pp. 54–73,Google Scholar reprinted in Shils, E., ed., Criteria for Scientific Development, Public Policy and National Goals, MIT Press, 1969, pp. 1–20.Google Scholar

7 M. Polanyi, in E. Shils op. cit., p. 19.

8 Auguste Comte, Système de politique positive, societé positiviste, Paris, 1929, 5th ed., Vol. I, pp. 2–4.

9 A. Comte, op. cit., pp. 99–103.

10 Salomon, J. J., Science et Politique, Paris, Seuil, 1970, p. 117:Google Scholar ‘The scientific society is not only one which desires science to be one of its goals, but also one whose scientists desire that their goals should coincide with those of society’.

11 Dobrov, G. M., ‘Scientific Potential as an Object of Investigation and Control in the Soviet Union’, Decision Making in National Science Policy, CIBA Foundation, J. and A. Churchill Ltd., London, 1968, pp. 189–201.Google Scholar

12 Habermas, J., La technique et la science comme ‘idéologie’, Paris, Gallimard, 1973, p. 9 Google Scholar and ff.

13 See for instance McRae, Kenneth and Lehmbruch, Gerhard: Consotiational Democracy: Political Accommodation in Segmented Societies, McClelland and Stewart, Toronto, 1974.Google Scholar

14 Apter, David, The Politics of Modernization, Chicago U. Press, 1965 Google Scholar; and Some Conceptual Approaches to the Study of Modernization, Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 1968. See also the works of G. Almond, A. Ezioni, S. Verba, E. Shils, J. Coleman, etc.

15 Wilensky, Harold L., Organizational Intelligence, Knowledge and Policy in Government and Industry, Basic Books Inc., New York, 1967, pp. xiv‐226.Google Scholar

16 Vannevar Bush, Science, the Endless Frontier, A Report to the President on a Program for Postwar Scientific Research, N.S.F., 1954, pp. 40–60.

17 Colloque National de Caen, 1–3 November 1956, Special Issue on Teaching and Scientific Research, Les cahiers de la République, Paris, January‐February, 1957, No. 5.

18 In ‘La science doit créer la Science’ the academician, Paton, B., answers the questions. Izvestiya, 10 07 1973, p. 3.Google Scholar French translation by CNRS, group ‘Politique et organisation de la recherche scientifique’, Series C. Documentation No. 2.

19 See for instance Chorafas, Dimitris N., The Knowledge Revolution, London, 1968.Google Scholar

20 Chorafas, op. cit., pp. 72–4.

21 A confession made on 15 December 1970 at the Faculty of Science in Paris (Halle aux vins) during a group discussion on ‘survival’, on the subject of ‘scientific work and the social machine’, Survivre, No. 5, December 1970‐January 1971.