Relativism in the Philosophy of Science

Relativism versus absolutism is a fundamental opposition in science, with Martin Kusch examining the controversies triggered by influential relativist proposals. He argues that defensible forms of relativism deny absolute truth and reject anything goes, distinguishing between them and post-truth thinking.

Format: Paperback / softback
Length: 75 pages
Publication date: 28 January 2021
Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Relativism versus absolutism is a fundamental opposition that has dominated reflections about science for much of its (modern) history. Often, these reflections have been inseparable from wider social-political concerns regarding the position of science in society. Where does this debate stand in the philosophy and sociology of science today? And how does the relativism question relate to current concerns with post-truth politics? In Relativism in the Philosophy of Science, Martin Kusch examines some of the most influential relativist proposals of the last fifty years and the controversies they have triggered. He argues that defensible forms of relativism deny that any sense can be made of a scientific result being absolutely true or justified and reject anything goes, which is the thought that all scientific results are epistemically on a par. Kusch concludes by distinguishing between defensible forms of relativism and post-truth thinking.

Relativism is a philosophical stance that emphasizes the contextual and relative nature of knowledge and truth. It suggests that there is no universal or absolute truth, but rather that different perspectives and cultures can have their own truths. Relativists argue that scientific results are not necessarily true or false, but rather are relative to the context in which they are produced and the beliefs and assumptions of the scientists involved.

On the other hand, absolutism is a philosophical stance that emphasizes the existence of universal and absolute truth. It suggests that there is a single, objective reality that can be understood through scientific inquiry and that scientific results are true or false based on their adherence to this objective reality. Absolutists argue that scientific methods and theories are reliable and that they can provide us with accurate knowledge about the world.

The debate between relativism and absolutism has been a central theme in the philosophy and sociology of science for many years. Relativists argue that scientific results are not necessarily true or false, but rather are relative to the context in which they are produced and the beliefs and assumptions of the scientists involved. They argue that scientific knowledge is not absolute, but rather is constructed through a process of social and cultural negotiation.

Absolutists argue that scientific results are true or false based on their adherence to a universal and absolute truth. They argue that scientific knowledge is objective and can be obtained through rigorous scientific inquiry and that scientific methods and theories are reliable and can provide us with accurate knowledge about the world.

The debate between relativism and absolutism has been influenced by a range of factors, including the development of postmodernism, the rise of science studies, and the increasing importance of interdisciplinary research. Postmodernism has challenged the idea of a universal and absolute truth, suggesting that truth is constructed through a complex web of social and cultural meanings. Science studies has emphasized the social and cultural construction of scientific knowledge and the role of power and politics in shaping scientific research.

The debate between relativism and absolutism has also been influenced by current concerns with post-truth politics. Post-truth politics is a political ideology that emphasizes the use of false or misleading information to influence public opinion and political outcomes. It is characterized by a disregard for facts and evidence and a reliance on emotion and ideology.

Relativists argue that post-truth politics is a result of the increasing relativism in society. They argue that the rise of social media and the internet has created a culture in which people are more likely to believe information that is consistent with their own beliefs and values, rather than information that is based on facts and evidence.

Absolutists argue that post-truth politics is a result of the decline of scientific literacy and the erosion of the authority of scientific institutions. They argue that the lack of knowledge about science and the lack of trust in scientific institutions has created a culture in which people are more likely to believe information that is consistent with their own beliefs and values, rather than information that is based on facts and evidence.

In conclusion, relativism versus absolutism is a fundamental opposition that has dominated reflections about science for much of its (modern) history. The debate between relativism and absolutism has been influenced by a range of factors, including the development of postmodernism, the rise of science studies, and the increasing importance of interdisciplinary research. The debate between relativism and absolutism has also been influenced by current concerns with post-truth politics. While relativists argue that scientific results are not necessarily true or false, but rather are relative to the context in which they are produced and the beliefs and assumptions of the scientists involved, absolutists argue that scientific results are true or false based on their adherence to a universal and absolute truth. The debate between relativism and absolutism is likely to continue to be a central theme in the philosophy and sociology of science for many years to come.

Weight: 142g
Dimension: 151 x 228 x 8 (mm)
ISBN-13: 9781108969611