At every stage, one figure has remained curiously intact.
The scientist.
The one who:
- constructs models
- follows methods
- evaluates evidence
- navigates paradigms
Even as objectivity has been reframed, the scientist persists as its bearer:
the subject who knows.
This, too, must be cut.
1. The last guarantor
When objectivity is questioned, it retreats into the subject:
- if knowledge is not pure, the scientist must be disciplined
- if bias exists, the scientist must eliminate it
- if disagreement persists, the scientist must judge correctly
The scientist becomes the guarantor of objectivity.
But this repeats the same move we have already dismantled.
The illicit unity is internalised.
2. The epistemic subject
The scientist is typically imagined as:
- a knower
- a reasoner
- a decision-maker
A locus where:
- meaning is held
- value is applied
- judgement is made
In other words:
the point at which construal and coordination converge.
But there is no reason to assume such convergence.
3. Re-cutting the scientist
Following the earlier analysis, we proceed differently:
The scientist is not a unified epistemic subject.It is an intersection of heterogeneous systems.
- semiotic processes of construal (models, interpretations)
- systems of value coordination (methods, norms, institutions)
Not integrated.
Not synthesised.
Intersecting.
4. Thinking as participation
From the side of meaning:
The scientist does not possess knowledge.
They participate in:
- constructing models
- deploying formalisms
- actualising phenomena
What appears as “understanding” is:
- engagement with available semiotic resources
- under specific constraints
There is no internal store of truths.
Only ongoing construal.
5. Acting as alignment
From the side of value:
The scientist does not freely choose methods.
They align with:
- disciplinary norms
- institutional expectations
- procedural requirements
What appears as “methodological decision” is:
- participation in coordinated practice
There is no autonomous source of action.
Only structured alignment.
6. Judgement without unity
Scientific judgement is often treated as the integration of:
- knowledge
- reasoning
- evidence
But from this perspective, judgement is:
the point at which intersecting systems produce a stabilised outcome.
- a model is selected
- a result is accepted
- a claim is endorsed
7. Training the intersection
Becoming a scientist is not acquiring knowledge alone.
It is learning to inhabit the intersection:
- to construe in disciplined ways
- to align with accepted practices
- to recognise valid outcomes
8. The illusion of autonomy
Despite this, the scientist experiences:
- thinking as internal
- judgement as personal
- decision as intentional
This is the same retrospective reconstruction we saw before:
- coordination becomes intention
- construal becomes representation
- coupling becomes belief
The scientist is narrated as a subjectto stabilise the intersection it inhabits.
9. Disagreement revisited
Scientific disagreement now takes on a different shape:
- not individuals holding different beliefs
- but intersections stabilising differently
- different construals under different constraints
- different alignments within value systems
Conflict is not between minds.
It is between configurations of relation.
10. Responsibility re-situated
What, then, of responsibility?
Surely the scientist is accountable.
Yes—but not because of an underlying unified subject.
Responsibility is:
a function of value systems.
- attribution of authorship
- assignment of credit and blame
- enforcement of norms
These regulate participation.
They do not express an inner essence.
11. The disappearance of the knower
With this, the figure of the scientist dissolves.
Not into nothing.
But into:
an intersection of construal and coordination,stabilised through practice,misrecognised as a unified knower.
The guarantor of objectivity disappears.
What remains is the relation.
12. The final step
And with that, the last internal support for the myth of purity is removed.
No:
- pure knowledge
- neutral practice
- unified subject
Only:
- semiotic construal
- value coordination
- their coupling
- their misrecognition
No comments:
Post a Comment