A Research On Karin Knorr-cetina’s Laboratory Constructivism Of Scientific Knowledge

Karin D. Knorr-Cetina is a famous Sociologist of Sociology of Scientific Knowledge (SSK) and a science anthropologists, who was born in Austria and afterward took citizenship in America. As one of the most important representatives of SSK, Knorr-Cetina’s main academic achievement is to construct and improve her "Laboratory Constructivism of Scientific Knowledge", which has had an important effect on western academic field. Cetina’s Laboratory Constructivism of Scientific Knowledge consists of laboratory microscopic research of experience constructivism and laboratory research of cultural constructivism. Cetina’s lab research during the early period focused on microscopic construction process of scientific knowledge with the method of "Field Research" in Scientific anthropology, aimed at exploring the social factors which play important roles in the construction of scientific knowledge. Cetina believed that scientific knowledge was constructed or made by scientists in the laboratories, and it was the product of the construction of social factors. Her viewpoint on constructivism actively challenged the traditional concepts about universalism, objectivism, and rationality, so it was in some way progressive and constructive. However, owing to its limitations, Cetina’s laboratory constructivism view of science was questioned by some academics both inside and outside SSK, which made it hard for her to further develop her constructivism thought. As SSK gradually declined, Cetina expanded and adjusted her laboratory constructivism research perspective, turning her attention to epistemic activities related to knowledge, and the cultural implication of the epistemic activities. That is to say, Cetina turned her attention to "the construction of the construction mechanism of scientific knowledge", and formed her viewpoint about Cultural Constructivism of Scientific Knowledge. Her study of epistemic cultures became the mark of the transforming of SSK’s lab study from the research of social constructivism to the research of epistemic cultures, which aroused continuous repercussions in the academic circles. Because of the mild cultural perspective, Cetina’s lab study of cultural constructivism showed great flexibility and rationality. Compared to the early laboratory constructivism, it was of more constructive significance. So, in my opinion, Cetina’s lab research program, which was extremely typical and inspiring in the whole SSK, is worth our while to study in deep and learn from.