Actor and analyst: A response to Coopmans and Button

作者: Harry Collins , Robert Evans

DOI: 10.1177/0306312714546242

关键词:

摘要: We question the logic of Coopmans and Button’s critique our analysis expertise on three grounds. First, their depends a clear distinction between actor analysts that we show cannot be maintained. Second, reticence to allow use taxonomies in expertise, suggesting it is contradicted by own descriptions expert work, accuse them making mistake way they relate commonsense specialist skills. Finally, express puzzlement at antiseptic-like precautions some ethnomethodologists apply analysts’ categories, especially given – as categories sometimes provide superior resource for understanding can change actors’ world well describing it.

参考文章(9)
Harold Maurice Collins, Are We All Scientific Experts Now ,(2014)
Harry Collins, Gary Sanders, They give you the keys and say ‘drive it!’ Managers, referred expertise, and other expertises Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A. ,vol. 38, pp. 621- 641 ,(2007) , 10.1016/J.SHPSA.2007.09.002
Harry Collins, Rejecting knowledge claims inside and outside science Social Studies of Science. ,vol. 44, pp. 722- 735 ,(2014) , 10.1177/0306312714536011
Harry Collins, Language and practice. Social Studies of Science. ,vol. 41, pp. 271- 300 ,(2011) , 10.1177/0306312711399665
Harry Collins, Gravity's Shadow University of Chicago Press. ,(2004) , 10.7208/CHICAGO/9780226113791.001.0001
Harry Collins, Robert Evans, Rethinking Expertise University of Chicago Press. ,(2007) , 10.7208/CHICAGO/9780226113623.001.0001