La méthode scientifique guide depuis des siècles l’étude des phénomènes naturels, mais cette méthode est progressivement sapée par la pensée dite “postmoderne”. Celle-ci exerce une influence souvent hégémonique dans les sciences humaines : dans nombre d’institutions, la sociologie des sciences est monopolisée par ce courant.
Désemparés par les querelles politiques autour de certaines technologies, des scientifiques appellent naïvement à la rescousse des sociologues, par exemple, sans s’apercevoir qu’il ne s’agit pas d’une sociologie “universelle”, mais d’une chapelle qui ne produit qu’une forme particulière de pensée.
En fait, les scientifiques, et plus généralement la société, ont du mal à identifier la menace, et même simplement la nature idéologique de ces courants de sciences humaines. »
Lire aussi mes articles en Anglais:
The postmodern assault on science. If all truths are equal, who cares what science has to say? Published by EMBO Reports.
“If there is no universal truth, as postmodern philosophy claims, then each social or political group should have the right to the reality that best suits them. What, then, are the consequences of applying postmodernist thinking when it comes to science? Risk assessment provides illuminating examples of how it corrupts the role of science in the public sphere.”
Why the postmodern attitude towards science should be denounced. Published by EMBO Reports.
“It is regrettable that, as soon as someone denounces attacks on science, some scientists feel the need to express mea culpas in the name of all scientists, past and present. What is at stake with relativists is that they introduce doubt into everything—truth, value, beauty and reason—that goes beyond sociology.
It is unfortunate that some scientists tend to fall into that same trap, confusing the ordinary behaviour of human beings with the capacity of science, as a source of knowledge, to learn about the laws of nature. Relativist ideology is trying to undermine science and it might succeed, especially if scientists themselves express doubts about the honesty and the rationality of their own work.”