学术文献库

Research in Theoretical Quantum Gravity has continued expansively even as it has become detached from classic arbiters of research such as direct empirical falsification. This makes it an interesting test case for social-scientific theories of what motivates and mediates contemporary scientific research and the nature of scientific objectivity. For our empirical investigation, we conducted 50 semi-structured interviews with researchers in the rival camps of String Theory and Loop Quantum Gravity, coded a subset for reoccurring themes, and subjected the resulting data to statistical analysis. Theoretically, we mobilize aspects of Daston and Galison's depiction of the scientific self and its relation to epistemic virtues, Pierre Bourdieu's field-centered account of social space, and Kantian notions of aesthetics in order to delineate the subjective tastes and the related process of collective consensus-making in contemporary quantum gravity research. We make two key contributions. First, our analysis sheds light on the inner workings of the field by connecting its internal epistemic struggles with relevant social-scientific theories. For example, we are able to suggest an explanation for how one approach, String Theory, has become so dominant. Second, our application of theories of social reproduction to the substance of scientific inquiry merits some substantive generalizations to Daston and Galison's framework. Most significantly, we propose as an addendum to their progression the notion of objectivity through intersubjectivity: objectivity obtained not through the suppression of the self but by its (regulated) pluralistic expression and performance.