Scientific truth is itself historical. The issue therefore is not
simply what is universal but what is evolving, and whether that
which is evolving is necessarily identifiable with progress. How
can the social sciences deal with the fact that they must describe,
formulate true statements about, an unequal world in which the
social scientists themselves are rooted? The claims of universalism have always been claims made by particular persons, and
these claimants usually have found themselves in opposition to
persons with competing claims. The fact that there are competing particularist views of what is universal forces us to take seriously questions about the neutrality of the scholar. The natural
sciences have long accepted the reality that the measurer intrudes on the measured. And yet this statement has remained
controversial in the social sciences where, if anything, it might
seem more obvious.
Reklam
To understand the importance of this epistemological revolution—f i rst the creation and consolidation of the concept of the so-called two cultures, and then within it the triumph of sci-entif i c universalism—one must situate it within the structure of our modern world-system. It is a capitalist world-economy. It has been in existence for some fi ve hundred years and has ex-panded from its initial locus (parts of Europe plus parts of the Americas) to incorporate by the nineteenth century the entire globe in its orbit, becoming the only historical system on the planet. Like all systems, it has had a life: its period of origin, its longish period of ongoing functioning, and its current terminal structural crisis. During its period of normal functioning, it op-erated by certain rules or constraints within certain physical boundaries that expanded over time. And these characteristics allow us to call it a system. Like all systems, however, it evolved in observable ways that permit us to label it a historical system. That is to say, its description along its itinerary, while retaining some basic systemic features, was always changing or evolving. We can describe its systemic features in terms of cyclical rhythms (changes that return to an equilibrium, perhaps a moving equi-librium), and its historical evolution in terms of secular trends (changes that move away from the equilibrium, eventually far from the equilibrium).
Never BecomeŞiir
We will never be happy,
because our expectation of happiness
is always evolving.
Sayfa 83 - burada o kadar doğru yazmış ki... bu kadar doğru olması beni duygulandırıyor.
