学科研究视域中知识社会学的理论整合与范式转换问题研究
|
摘要
迄今围绕知识社会学开展的研究主要集中于两个层面：一是对知识社会学学科的理解和诠释,二是对知识社会学具体议题的讨论。对于前一个层面来说,既有的研究成果更多地停留在对涉及知识社会学问题的各种学说和理论进行梳理的自发阶段,这种看待知识社会学的方式较少具备一种方法论的自觉意识。基于这一点,本研究试图以社会学的视角切入对知识社会学自身的分析。本研究的理论框架来自知识社会学和科学社会学中“学科研究”的相关理论。在对默顿、克兰、库恩、布迪厄、惠特利以及德兰迪等学者的学科研究工作进行梳理和批判的基础上,本文提出：学科可以被理解为一种“逻辑—社会整合体”——一方面,作为一种专门性的知识形式,学科能够以异于常识的特殊的认知方式和知识累积方式实现自身的演进,这种自主性地位是由社会赋予的,社会与学科知识之间是一种支配—被支配关系：而学科为了维持其合法性地位,需按照特定的社会期望展开其认知活动。另一方面,学科知识之所以能够获得社会的承认,其合法性源于：它能够按照一种不同于日常知识生成原则的“逻辑性”原则,来为整个社会提供某种客观知识或真理；这又决定了学科知识受到社会支配的方式是间接的和隐蔽的。本文认为,“作为逻辑性的社会性”或“作为合理性的合法性”构成了学科知识的内生性原则。在这一原则的支配下,认知的合理性程度以及学科知识同社会的一致性状况决定了特定学科的演进轨迹。
基于上述理解,本文对作为一门特殊学科的知识社会学进行了诠释。作为一门学科,知识社会学满足学科社会学的一般性分析框架；同时,知识社会学又是一门特殊的学科,这种特殊性源于它研究对象的特殊上——知识社会学的研究对象包含了它自身,这使得该学科不仅包含一般性的知识成果,并且成为具有“反身性”特点的知识形式：从理论层面上,知识社会学不仅包含一般性的知识—社会理论,还包括了这样一种理论对自身适用性程度的考察——这种考察见诸社会学知识论等领域。而在经验研究层面上,知识社会学不仅囊括了各种以日常知识和文化为研究对象的研究,还涉及反思社会学等领域的工作。由于涉及众多维度,使知识社会学各维度间的整合问题成为衡量知识社会学学科知识合理性的重要指标。
本文将知识社会学学科知识体系的整合状态称为“范式”,并从知识社会学的已有研究中,概括出知识社会学历史上出现过的两大范式：社会实在论范式和社会建构论范式。其中,社会实在论范式在社会观方面秉持实在论立场,认为社会是一种客观现实；在知识与社会关系上持有二元论观点,认为知识与社会属于两种不同性质的范畴；在社会学知识论中预设了一种符合论真理观；认为包括社会学在内的科学知识独立于社会范畴,不受社会因素的影响；同时,认为知识社会学是一门独立于社会现实的、高度自主的学科。而社会建构论范式在社会观方面秉持建构论观点,认为社会是个体主观意义的外化；在知识与社会的关系上持有一元论观点,认为二者都反映了意义的不同层面；在社会学知识论方面预设的是建构论的真理观,认为科学(以及社会学)知识是通过特定思维框架来实现对认知对象的把握；知识社会学应当无差别地审视科学与非科学知识,前者的真理性建立在某种理性共识的基础上；同时,认为知识社会学本身同整个社会文化环境之间具有双向建构的关系,其自主性是相对的。
从历史上看,知识社会学经历了从社会实在论范式到社会建构论范式的转换。这种转换的动因是知识社会学在社会实在论范式下不能很好地贯彻反身性的分析原则。而知识社会学中范式转换的实质,是学科知识各维度之间由不一致向一致的演进。总之,知识社会学所具有的这样一种特殊的学科合理性模式,使该学科在认知层面上以理论整合与范式转换作为理解其发展演进模式的核心线索。而在形态方面,知识社会学在其发展过程中,隐传统成为其思想理论的重要组成部分,并且呈现出显传统和隐传统并存、相互交织的状态；同时,知识社会学并非独立于社会,而是同整个社会文化情境呈现出一种双向建构的关系。
Heretofore the studies of the sociology of knowledge (SK) could be classified into two parts:the reviews of the SK, and the studies of the concrete issues in the SK. Now the existing studies of the first part are various kinds of pectinations of the SK theories, these pectinations lack methodological awareness. Based on this, this thesis will take SK itself as "study object" and give it sociological analysis. The framework of this study originates from the pertinent theories of "specialty study" in the SK and the sociology of science. By summarizing and criticizing the specialty theories of Merton, Klein, Kuhn, Bourdieu, Whitley and Delanty, the point is raised that a specialty could be understood as a "logical-social cohesion". On the one hand, as a special way of knowing, scientific specialties evolve and accumulate in a way that different from the common-sense knowledge does. The particularity and autonomy of the scientific specialties are granted by the society. It is the social need for exact knowledge that determines that scientific specialties could gain their legitimacy and develop in their own way. In other words, the society dominates the specialty knowledge, and the specialty should carry out its cognitive process in accordance with the established social expectation to maintain its legitimacy. On the other hand, the legitimacy that scientific specialty knowledge can acquire social acknowledgment lies in that scientific specialties act on logical principles, which distinct from the generating principle of common-sense knowledge. It determines that the society dominates the scientific specialty knowledge in an indirect or hidden way. This dissertation holds that the endogenous principle of scientific specialty knowledge could be described as "logical as social" or "legitimacy as rationality". The given specialty evolves in the direction determined by the rationality of the cognition and consistency between the specialties and society.
Based on the understandings above, this dissertation sees the SK as a unique specialty. As a specialty, the SK fits the general analytic framework of specialty study. As a special specialty, the SK's uniqueness comes from the special object it has to face. As the SK itself is also one kind of knowledge, the study of the SK has to contain itself, means that if any interpretation of the SK wants to make sense, it has to be suitable to explain the SK knowledge, too. Thus the SK specialty has the reflexive character. Therefore, in the theoretical level, SK contains not only the theory of society-knowledge relationship, but also the investigation of the applicability of the theory to SK itself, which could be found in the sphere of sociological methodology. In the empirical level, the SK encapsulates not only the study of common-sense knowledge and culture, but also science and sociology itself. These multiple dimensions of the SK call for the integration of this specialty, which could be seen as a critical criterion of measuring whether the SK theory is reasonable or not.
This thesis sees the integrated state of the knowledge system of the SK as a "paradigm", and summarizes two typical paradigms in the history of the SK:the paradigm of the social realism and the paradigm of the social constructivism. The social realism sees the society as an objective reality. It holds the dualistic perspective on the knowledge-society relationship, sees the society and knowledge as two distinct categories, and presupposes a reflective mode of interpretation. It also believes that scientific knowledge, including sociology, acts independently from the society, be immune to the social influence, and SK itself is also an autonomic specialty and is independent from society. On the contrary, the social constructivism sees the society as the externalization of individual's subjective meanings. Society and knowledge are two sides of a coin, they have unitary relationship. It holds that scientific knowledge (including sociology) could not be immune to the sociological examination, because all kinds of knowledge are constructive, and SK should treat science and non-science impartially. The truth of the scientific knowledge could be found in the rational consensus of the society. It is also believed that SK itself is in a co-constructive relation with the whole social and cultural contexts, and as a specialty, SK's autonomy is limited.
Historically, the SK has undergone a paradigm shift from the social realism to the social constructivism. The momentum for this shift lies in the fact that the paradigm of the social realism could not solve the problem of reflexivity perfectly. The essence of the paradigm shift in the SK is that the inconsistency of the different dimensions of the SK seeks into consistency. To summarize, as a special specialty, the SK owns a specific rationality mode. In the cognitive level, the SK takes the theoretical integration and the paradigm shift as the core clue to understand and interpret its knowledge evolvement. In terms of morphology, the SK sees the latent tradition as the key component of the specialty, which co-exists and intertwines with the manifest tradition. At the same time, the SK specialty is not simply independent from the society, but is in a two-way constructive relationship with the entire social and cultural context.
基于上述理解,本文对作为一门特殊学科的知识社会学进行了诠释。作为一门学科,知识社会学满足学科社会学的一般性分析框架；同时,知识社会学又是一门特殊的学科,这种特殊性源于它研究对象的特殊上——知识社会学的研究对象包含了它自身,这使得该学科不仅包含一般性的知识成果,并且成为具有“反身性”特点的知识形式：从理论层面上,知识社会学不仅包含一般性的知识—社会理论,还包括了这样一种理论对自身适用性程度的考察——这种考察见诸社会学知识论等领域。而在经验研究层面上,知识社会学不仅囊括了各种以日常知识和文化为研究对象的研究,还涉及反思社会学等领域的工作。由于涉及众多维度,使知识社会学各维度间的整合问题成为衡量知识社会学学科知识合理性的重要指标。
本文将知识社会学学科知识体系的整合状态称为“范式”,并从知识社会学的已有研究中,概括出知识社会学历史上出现过的两大范式：社会实在论范式和社会建构论范式。其中,社会实在论范式在社会观方面秉持实在论立场,认为社会是一种客观现实；在知识与社会关系上持有二元论观点,认为知识与社会属于两种不同性质的范畴；在社会学知识论中预设了一种符合论真理观；认为包括社会学在内的科学知识独立于社会范畴,不受社会因素的影响；同时,认为知识社会学是一门独立于社会现实的、高度自主的学科。而社会建构论范式在社会观方面秉持建构论观点,认为社会是个体主观意义的外化；在知识与社会的关系上持有一元论观点,认为二者都反映了意义的不同层面；在社会学知识论方面预设的是建构论的真理观,认为科学(以及社会学)知识是通过特定思维框架来实现对认知对象的把握；知识社会学应当无差别地审视科学与非科学知识,前者的真理性建立在某种理性共识的基础上；同时,认为知识社会学本身同整个社会文化环境之间具有双向建构的关系,其自主性是相对的。
从历史上看,知识社会学经历了从社会实在论范式到社会建构论范式的转换。这种转换的动因是知识社会学在社会实在论范式下不能很好地贯彻反身性的分析原则。而知识社会学中范式转换的实质,是学科知识各维度之间由不一致向一致的演进。总之,知识社会学所具有的这样一种特殊的学科合理性模式,使该学科在认知层面上以理论整合与范式转换作为理解其发展演进模式的核心线索。而在形态方面,知识社会学在其发展过程中,隐传统成为其思想理论的重要组成部分,并且呈现出显传统和隐传统并存、相互交织的状态；同时,知识社会学并非独立于社会,而是同整个社会文化情境呈现出一种双向建构的关系。
Heretofore the studies of the sociology of knowledge (SK) could be classified into two parts:the reviews of the SK, and the studies of the concrete issues in the SK. Now the existing studies of the first part are various kinds of pectinations of the SK theories, these pectinations lack methodological awareness. Based on this, this thesis will take SK itself as "study object" and give it sociological analysis. The framework of this study originates from the pertinent theories of "specialty study" in the SK and the sociology of science. By summarizing and criticizing the specialty theories of Merton, Klein, Kuhn, Bourdieu, Whitley and Delanty, the point is raised that a specialty could be understood as a "logical-social cohesion". On the one hand, as a special way of knowing, scientific specialties evolve and accumulate in a way that different from the common-sense knowledge does. The particularity and autonomy of the scientific specialties are granted by the society. It is the social need for exact knowledge that determines that scientific specialties could gain their legitimacy and develop in their own way. In other words, the society dominates the specialty knowledge, and the specialty should carry out its cognitive process in accordance with the established social expectation to maintain its legitimacy. On the other hand, the legitimacy that scientific specialty knowledge can acquire social acknowledgment lies in that scientific specialties act on logical principles, which distinct from the generating principle of common-sense knowledge. It determines that the society dominates the scientific specialty knowledge in an indirect or hidden way. This dissertation holds that the endogenous principle of scientific specialty knowledge could be described as "logical as social" or "legitimacy as rationality". The given specialty evolves in the direction determined by the rationality of the cognition and consistency between the specialties and society.
Based on the understandings above, this dissertation sees the SK as a unique specialty. As a specialty, the SK fits the general analytic framework of specialty study. As a special specialty, the SK's uniqueness comes from the special object it has to face. As the SK itself is also one kind of knowledge, the study of the SK has to contain itself, means that if any interpretation of the SK wants to make sense, it has to be suitable to explain the SK knowledge, too. Thus the SK specialty has the reflexive character. Therefore, in the theoretical level, SK contains not only the theory of society-knowledge relationship, but also the investigation of the applicability of the theory to SK itself, which could be found in the sphere of sociological methodology. In the empirical level, the SK encapsulates not only the study of common-sense knowledge and culture, but also science and sociology itself. These multiple dimensions of the SK call for the integration of this specialty, which could be seen as a critical criterion of measuring whether the SK theory is reasonable or not.
This thesis sees the integrated state of the knowledge system of the SK as a "paradigm", and summarizes two typical paradigms in the history of the SK:the paradigm of the social realism and the paradigm of the social constructivism. The social realism sees the society as an objective reality. It holds the dualistic perspective on the knowledge-society relationship, sees the society and knowledge as two distinct categories, and presupposes a reflective mode of interpretation. It also believes that scientific knowledge, including sociology, acts independently from the society, be immune to the social influence, and SK itself is also an autonomic specialty and is independent from society. On the contrary, the social constructivism sees the society as the externalization of individual's subjective meanings. Society and knowledge are two sides of a coin, they have unitary relationship. It holds that scientific knowledge (including sociology) could not be immune to the sociological examination, because all kinds of knowledge are constructive, and SK should treat science and non-science impartially. The truth of the scientific knowledge could be found in the rational consensus of the society. It is also believed that SK itself is in a co-constructive relation with the whole social and cultural contexts, and as a specialty, SK's autonomy is limited.
Historically, the SK has undergone a paradigm shift from the social realism to the social constructivism. The momentum for this shift lies in the fact that the paradigm of the social realism could not solve the problem of reflexivity perfectly. The essence of the paradigm shift in the SK is that the inconsistency of the different dimensions of the SK seeks into consistency. To summarize, as a special specialty, the SK owns a specific rationality mode. In the cognitive level, the SK takes the theoretical integration and the paradigm shift as the core clue to understand and interpret its knowledge evolvement. In terms of morphology, the SK sees the latent tradition as the key component of the specialty, which co-exists and intertwines with the manifest tradition. At the same time, the SK specialty is not simply independent from the society, but is in a two-way constructive relationship with the entire social and cultural context.
引文
① 在英文中,作为词根的dis-和sub-都有“分支”、“分化”的涵义,《韦氏美语词典》中将dis-解释为apart(分开、分离),而sub-的意思则是secondary(次级的)、under, below, beneath(在…之下的)(Dalgish,1997:387、1288)。本文将“学科”作为研究主题,中文的“学科”一词在不同程度上囊括了上述词汇在表示“知识的分支”时所指涉的涵义。
② 其它学者对于“学科”概念的阐释,见比彻、特罗勒尔,《学术部落及其领地：知识探索与学科文化》,唐跃勤、蒲茂华、陈洪捷译,北京：北京大学出版社,2008,43页。Chubin, D., The Conceptualization of Scientific Specialties, The Sociological Quarterly,1976, vol.17(4):450.
① Bloor, D., Knowledge and Social Imagery., Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1991, p.46.
② 布迪厄、华康德,《实践与反思：反思社会学导引》,李猛、李康译,北京：中央编译出版社,2004。
① 检索主页：http://www.worldcat.org/advancedsearch,关键字："sociology of knowledge".图书检索：格式：图书,文种：英语。学位论文检索：内容：硕士论文/博士论文,文种：英语。以上检索均在检索后去除重复文献所得,后文中的中文检索遵循相同方法。检索日期：2011-9-20。
① Speier, H., Book Review:Ideology and Utopia, American Journal of Sociology,1937, vol.43(1):155-166.
① DeGre, G., The Sociology of Knowledge and the Problem of Truth, Journal of the History of Ideas,1941, vol. 2(1):110-115.
② Child, A., The Problem of Imputation in the Sociology of Knowledge, Ethics,1941a, vol.51(2):200-219
③ Child, A., The Theoretical Possibilities of the Sociology of Knowledge, Ethics,1941b, vol.51(4):392-418.
④ Child, A., The Existential Determination of Thought, Ethics,1942, vol.52(2):153-185.
⑤ Child, A., The Problem of Truth in the Sociology of Knowledge, Ethics,1947, vol.58(1):18-34.
⑥ Merton, R., The Sociology of Knowledge., Isis,1937, vol.27(3):493-503.
⑦ Mills, Methodological Consequences of the Sociology of Knowledge, American Jorunal of Sociology,1940, vol. 46(3):316-330.
⑧ Wolff, Kurt H, The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography, The Hague:Mouton,1967.
① Stark, W., The Sociology of Knowledge, An Essay in Aid of a Deeper Understanding of the History of Ideas. Glencoe, Ill. The Free Press,1958.
② Maquet, Jacques Jerome Pierre, The Sociology of Knowledge, its Structure and its Relation to the Philosophy of Knowledge; a Critical Analysis of the Systems of Karl Mannheim and Pitirim A. Sorokin., Boston, Beacon Press, 1951.
* Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books,1966.
④ Neisser, H, On the Sociology of Knowledge, New York, J.H. Heineman,1965.
⑤ Elias, Norbert, Sociology of Knowledge:New Perspectives, Oxford:Clarendon,1971.
⑥ Remmling, G., Towards the Sociology of Knowledge:Origin and Development of a Sociological Thought Style; London:Routledge and Kegan Paul,1973.
⑦ Frisby, David, The Alienated Mind:the Sociology of Knowledge in Germany 1918-33. London:Heinemann Educational Books,1983.
① Remmling, G., Road to Suspicion; a Study of Modern Mentality and the Sociology of Knowledge. New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts,1967.
② Woolgar, Steve, Knowledge and Reflexivity:New Frontiers in the Sociology of Knowledge., London:Sage, 1988.
③ Hekman, Susan J., Hermeneutics and the Sociology of Knowledge., Notre Dame, Ind.:University of Notre Dame Press,1986.
④ Bailey, Leon, Critical Theory and the Sociology of Knowledge:a Comparative Study in the Theory of Ideology. New York:P.Lang,1994.
⑤ Schwartz, Barry, Vertical Classification:a Study in Structuralism and the Sociology of Knowledge., Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1981.
⑥ Rempel, Francis Warren, The Role of Value in Karl Mannheim's Sociology of Knowledge, The Hague, Mouton, 1965.
⑦ Simonds, A. P., Karl Mannheim's Sociology of Knowledge., Oxford:Clarendon Press,1978.
⑧ Remmling, G., The Sociology of Karl Mannheim:with a Bibliographical Guide to the Sociology of Knowledge, Ideological Analysis, and Social Planning., London:Routledge & K. Paul,1975.
⑨ Baum, Gregory, Truth Beyond Relativism:Karl Mannheim's Sociology of Knowledge. Milwaukee:Marquette University Press,1977.
⑩ Longhurst, Brian, Karl Mannheim and the Contemporary Sociology of Knowledge., New York:St. Martin's Press,1989.
① Kerlin, Michael J., Crossing Berger's Fiery Brook:Religious Truth and Sociology of Knowledge., Washington, D.C.:Thomist Press,1976.
② Barber, Michael D., Social Typifications and the Elusive Other:the Place of Sociology of Knowledge in Alfred Schutz's Phenomenology., London:Associated University Presses,1988.
① Abercrombie, Nicholas, Class, Structure, and Knowledge:Problems in the Sociology of Knowledge., Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1980.
② Law, John, Power, Action, and Belief:a New Sociology of Knowledge?, London; Boston:Routledge & Kegan Paul,1986.
③ Meja, Volker; Nico Stehr, Knowledge and Politics:the Sociology of Knowledge Dispute., London; New York: Routledge,1990.
④ Batty, D., Knowledge and its Organization, Maryland:University of Maryland Press,1976.
⑤ Kerr, D., Barriers to Integrity:Modern Modes of Knowledge Utilization, Epping:Bowker,1984.
⑥ Nowotny, H., Peter Scott & Michael Gibbons, Rethinking Science:Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty, Cambridge:Polity Press,2001.
⑦ Delanty, G, Challenging Knowledge:the University in the Knowledge Society, Buckingham & Philadelphia: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press,2001.
⑧ Leet, M., Aftereffects of Knowledge in Modernity:Politics, Aesthetics, and Individuality., Albany:State University of New York Press,2004.
⑨ Ash, E., Expertise:practical knowledge and the early modern state., Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 2010.
① Glennon, L., A Sociology of Knowledge Analysis of the Women's Liberation Movement., New Brunswick, N. J.; Glennon, L.,1979, Women and Dualism.:a Sociology of Knowledge Analysis., New York:Longman,1974.
② Tanesini, Alessandra, An Introduction to Feminist Epistemologies:A Philosophical Introduction., Oxford: Blackwell Publishers,1998.
③ Rosser, Sue Vilhauer, Women, Science, and Society:The Crucial Union., New York:Teachers College Press, 2000.
① Shanks, M, Symmetrical Archaeology, World Archaeology,2007, vol.41(2):343-386.
① Karacsony, A, Soul-life-knowledge:The Young Mannheim's Way to Sociology, Studies in East European Thought,2008, vol.18(4):724-741.
② Sallaz, JJ; Zavisca, J, Bourdieu in American Sociology,1980-2004, Annual Review of Sociology,2007, vol. 46(2):305-354.
③ Dong, D; Chang, TK; Chen, D, Reporting AIDS and the Invisible Victims in China:Official Knowledge as News in the People's Daily,1986-2002, Journal of Health Communication,2008, vol.25(1):81-97.
④ Cordoba, JR; Farquharson, F, Enquiring into Skills Development with SSM:A South African Experience, 'Systems Research and Behavioral Science,2008, vol.22(2):120-131.
⑤ Hansen, RE, Program Equity Issues in Schooling:The Testimony of Technology Teachers, International Journal Of Technology And Design Education,2008, Jan.2th,144-156.
⑥ Brandwein, P, A Judicial Abandonment of Blacks? Rethinking the "State Action" Cases of the Waite Court, Law & Society Review,2007, vol.35(2):229-242.
⑦ Ribeiro, R, The Language Barrier as an Aid to Communication, Social Studies of Science,2007, vol.33:21-41.
⑧ Yeh, NC, A Framework for Understanding Culture and its Relationship to Information Behaviour:Taiwanese Aborigines' Information Behaviour, Information Research-An International Electronic Journal,2006, vol.29(4): 413-441.
① 舒炜光、邱仁宗,《当代西方科学哲学书评(2版)》,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,第3页。
② 萨顿,《科学史和新人文主义》,陈恒六、刘兵、朱维光译,北京：华夏出版社,1989,第1、3页。
③ 丹皮尔,《科学史：及其与哲学和宗教的关系》,李珩译,北京：商务印书馆,1997,第2页。
① 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001。
② 陈玉林,《技术史研究的文化转向》,沈阳：东北大学出版社,2010。
① 贝尔纳,《科学的社会功能》,陈体芳译,北京：商务印书馆,1982。
② 默顿,《十七世纪英格兰的科学、技术与社会》,范岱年等译,北京：商务印书馆,2000。
① 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,第365-376页,2010。
② 郑丹,《默顿一般社会学理论与其科学社会学理论的关系》,《科学文化评论》,2007年第1期,57页。
① Cole, J.& Harriet Zuckerman, The Emergence of a Scientific Specialty:The Self-Exemplifying Case of the Sociology of Science. In Lewis Coser (ed.). The Idea of Social Structure,1975, pp.160-162., New York:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
② 默顿,《科学社会学散忆》,鲁旭东译,北京：商务印书馆,2004,第8-9页。
③ 默顿,《科学社会学散忆》,鲁旭东译,北京：商务印书馆,2004,第82页。
① 普赖斯,《小科学、大科学》,宋剑耕、戴振飞译,北京：世界科学出版社,1982,第8-9页。
② 克兰,《无形学院：知识在科学共同体的扩散》,刘珺珺、顾昕、王德禄译,1988,北京：华夏出版社,第2页。
③ 克兰,《无形学院：知识在科学共同体的扩散》,刘珺珺、顾听、王德禄译,1988,北京：华夏出版社,第36-37页。
① 克兰,《无形学院：知识在科学共同体的扩散》,刘珺珺、顾昕、王德禄译,北京：华夏出版社,1988,第36-37页。
② 转引自克兰,《无形学院：知识在科学共同体的扩散》,刘珺珺、顾昕、王德禄译,北京：华夏出版社,1988,第149页。
③ Small, H., A Co-Citation Model of a Scientific Specialty:A Longitudinal Study of Collagen Research., Social Studies of Science,1977, Vol.7(2):139-166.; Small, H.& Henry Griffith, The Structure of Scientific Literatures I: Identifying and Graphing Specialties., Science Studies,1974, vol.4(1):17-40.
④ Mullins, N., The Development of a Scientific Specialty:the Phage Group and the Origins of Molecular Biology., Minerva,1972, vol.10:52-82.; Mullins, N., Theories and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology. New York:Harper & Row Publishers,1973.
⑤ Chubin, D., The Conceptualization of Scientific Specialties, The Sociological Quarterly,1976, vol.17(4): 448-476.
① Edge, David & Michael J. Mulkay, Astronomy Transformed:the Emergence of Radio Astronomy in Britain., New York:John Wiley & Sons,1976.
② Collins, H., The TEA Set:Tacit Knowledge and Scientific Networks, Science Studies,1974, vol.4(2):165-185.
③ Lankford, J., Amateurs and Astrophysics:A Neglected Aspect in the Development of a Scientific Specialty., Social Studies of Science,1981, vol.11:275-303.
④ Shrum, W., Scientific Specialties and Technical Systems., Social Studies of Science,1984, vol.14:63-90.
⑤ Chubin, D., The Conceptualization of Scientific Specialties, The Sociological Quarterly,1976. vol.17(4):449.
⑥ Shrum, W., Scientific Specialties and Technical Systems., Social Studies of Science,1984, vol.14:63.
① Small, H.& Henry Griffith, The Structure of Scientific Literatures l:Identifying and Graphing Specialties., Science Studies,1974, vol.4(1):19.
② Merton, R., On Theoretical Sociology:Five Essays. Old and New. New York:Free Press,1967, p.27.
① 富勒,《科学的统治：开放社会的意识形态与未来》,刘钝译,上海：上海科技教育出版社,2004,第125页。
② Mullins, N., The Development of a Scientific Specialty:the Phage Group and the Origins of Molecular Biology., Minerva,1972, vol.10:54.
③ Mullins, N., Theories and Theory Croups in Contemporary American Sociology. New York:Harper & Row Publishers,1973, pp.20-25.
① 下表转引自Mullins, N., Theories and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology. New York: Harper & Row Publishers,1973, p.28.
① Mullins, N., Theories and Theory Croups in Contemporary American Sociology. New York:Harper & Row Publishers,1973, pp.29-30.
① Knorr-Cetina, Karin, Scientific Communities or transepistemic arenas of research?, Social Studies of Science, 1982, vol.12:101-130.
① Turner, S., Social Constructivism and Social Theory., Sociological Theory,1991, vol.9:pp.27-28.
② Whitley, R., Communication Nets in Science:Status and Citation Patterns in Animal Physiology., Sociological Review,1969, vol.17:219-233.; Whitley, R., Black Boxism and the Sociology of Science:a Discussion of the Major Developments in the Field, pp.61-92 in Paul Halmos(ed.), The Sociology of Science. The Sociological Review, Monograph 18,1972.
③ 惠特利,《科学的智力组织和社会组织》,赵万里、陈玉林、薛晓斌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2011。
① 舒炜光、邱仁宗,《当代西方科学哲学书评(2版)》,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,第20页。
① 迪尔凯姆,《自杀论》,冯韵文译,北京：商务印书馆,2001。
② 伯格、卢克曼,《现实的社会构建》,汪涌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
① 舒炜光、邱仁宗,《当代西方科学哲学书评(2版)》,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,第156页。
② 舒炜光、邱仁宗,《当代西方科学哲学书评(2版)》,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,第93页。
① 默顿,《论理论社会学》,何凡兴、李卫红、王丽娟译,北京：华夏出版社,1990,第94页。
② 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第9页。
③ 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第157页。
① 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第22页。
② 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第31-32页。
③ 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第60页。
① 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第101页。
② 除《科学革命的结构》外,这些分析也可见库恩的其他作品：库恩,《哥白尼革命：西方思想发展中的行星天文学》,吴国盛等译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003：库恩,《结构之后的路》,邱慧译,北京：北京大学出版社,2012。
① 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第136、140页。
② 库恩,《必要的张力》,范岱年、纪树立译,北京：北京大学出版社,2004,第290页。
① 舒炜光、邱仁宗,《当代西方科学哲学书评(2版)》,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,第184页。
② 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第101页。
Giddens, A., Positivism and Sociology., London:Hutchinson.,1974, p. IX.
② 赵万里、徐敬怡,《符号互动论视野下的科学社会研究》,《自然辩证法通讯》,2007年第6期,47-53页。
③ 林奇,《科学实践与日常活动：常人方法论对科学的社会研究》,邢冬梅译,苏州：苏州大学出版社,2010。
① 布鲁尔,《知识和社会意象》,艾彦译,北京：东方出版社,2001,第7页。
② 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001,第142页。
③ 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001,第150页。
① 布迪厄、华康德,《实践与反思：反思社会学导引》,李猛、李康译,北京：中央编译出版社,2004。
② 关于布迪厄的知识社会学思想,见赵万里、赵超,《生成图式与反思理性：解析布迪厄的知识社会学理论》,《社会》2012年第2期,33-50页。
③ 布尔迪厄,《科学之科学与反观性》,陈圣生等译,南宁：广西师范大学出版社,2006,第57-58页。
① 赵万里、赵超,《生成图式与反思理性：解析布迪厄的知识社会学理论》,《社会》2012年第2期,44页。
② 赵万里、赵超,《生成图式与反思理性：解析布迪厄的知识社会学理论》,《社会》2012年第2期,44页。
③ 布尔迪厄,《科学之科学与反观性》,陈圣生等译,南宁：广西师范大学出版社,2006,第70页。
④ 布尔迪厄,《科学的社会用途：写给科学场的临床社会学》,刘成富、张艳译,南京大学出版社,2005,第36页。
⑤ 波丢,《人：学术者》,王作虹译,贵阳：贵州人民出版社,2006,第44页。
① 波丢,《人：学术者》,王作虹译,贵阳：贵州人民出版社,2006,第69页。图2.2为作者总结。
② 波丢,《人：学术者》,王作虹译,贵阳：贵州人民出版社,2006,第71页。
① 惠特利,《科学的智力组织和社会组织》,赵万里、陈玉林、薛晓斌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2011,第91页。
① 惠特利,《科学的智力组织和社会组织》,赵万里、陈玉林、薛晓斌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2011,第115页。
① 转引自惠特利,《科学的智力组织和社会组织》,赵万里、陈玉林、薛晓斌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2011,第150页。
心相关论述见Stehr, N., Knowledge Society. London:Sage,1994德兰迪,《知识社会中的大学》,黄建如译,北京：北京大学出版社,2010。
② 利奥塔尔,《后现代状态：关于知识的报告》,车槿山译,北京：三联书店,1997。
③ 贝克,《风险社会》,何博闻译,南京：译林出版社,2004。
④ 鲍曼,《立法者与阐释者：论现代性、后现代性与知识分子》,洪涛译,上海：上海人民出版社,2000。
⑤ Gibbons, M., Limoges, C, Nowotny, H. et al, The New Production of Knowledge:the Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London:Sage,1994.
① Fuller, Philosophy, Rhetoric, and the End of Knowledge:the Coming of Science and Technology Studies., Madison, Wisc.:University of Wisconsin Press,1993.; Wallerstein, I., et al., The Structures of Knowledge, or, How Many Ways May We Know? New York:State University of New York at Binghamton,1996.
② 德兰迪,《知识社会中的大学》,黄建如译,北京：北京大学出版社,2010,第125页。
① 德兰迪,《知识社会中的大学》,黄建如译,北京：北京大学出版社,2010,第125页。
② 德兰迪,《知识社会中的大学》,黄建如译,北京：北京大学出版社,2010,第4、125页。
① Meja, Volker; Nico Stehr, The Sociology of Knowledge., Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA, USA:Edward Elgar Pub.,1999, p. XIII.
② McCarthy, E., Knowledge as Culture:the New Sociology of Knowledge, London and New York:Routledge., 1996,p.1.
③ Curtis, James E; John W Petras, The Sociology of Knowledge, a Reader, New York, Praeger.,1970, p.261.
④ Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books.,1966, p.16.
① 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,第63页。
② Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books.,1966, p.15.
③ 金岳霖,《知识论》,北京：商务印书馆,1983,第1页。
④ 默顿,《社会理论和社会结构》,唐少杰、齐心等译,南京：译林出版社,2008,第592页。
③ Curtis, James E; John W Petras, The Sociology of Knowledge, a Reader., New York, Praeger.,1970, p.7.
① 马尔凯,《科学与知识社会学》,林聚任等译,北京：东方出版社,2001,第3页。
② 胡军,《知识论》,北京：北京大学出版社,2006,第52页。
③ 涂尔干、莫斯,,《原始分类》,汲喆译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005,第102-104页。
① Mead, G., Mind, Self and Society. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1934.; Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books,1966.
② 胡辉华,《论知识社会学的困境》,《哲学研究》,2005年第4期,第92页。
③ 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,第30页。
① 刘文旋,《知识的社会性：知识社会学概要》,《哲学动态》,2002年第1期,第45页。
① 斯宾格勒,《西方的没落》,齐世荣、田农、林传鼎等译,北京：商务印书馆,1991。
② Frisby, David, The Alienated Mind:the Sociology of Knowledge in Germany 1918-33. London:Heinemann Educational Books,1983. p.1.
① Hagstrom, W., Factors Related to the Use of Different Modes of Publishing Research in Four Scientific Fields., pp.85-124 in Carnot E. Nelson and D. K. Pollock(eds.), Communication Among Scientists and Engineers. Lexington, Mass:Lexington Books.,1970, pp.91-93.
② Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books,1966.
① 布迪厄、华康德,《实践与反思：反思社会学导引》,李猛、李康译,北京：中央编译出版社,2004,第101-102页。
① Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books.,1966, p.16.
② Wolff, Kurt H, The sociology of knowledge in the United States of America:a trend report and bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.5.
③ Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and Utopia:an Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge, London, K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & co., ltd.; New York, Harcourt, Brace and company.,1936, p.237.
④ Coser, L., Sociology of Knowledge., in Sill, D., eds., International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, The Macmillan Co & The Free Press, N.Y.,1968, vol.7, p.428.
① Craig, E., Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy., London & New York:Routledge.,1998, p.1.
② Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.8.
③ Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge New York:Penguin Books.,1966, p.25.
① Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and Utopia:an Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge, London, K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & co., ltd.; New York, Harcourt, Brace and company.,1936, p. XXXI.
② Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.20.
① 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,第29页。
② 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,14-15页。
① 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,第24页。
② 舍勒,《知识社会学问题》,艾彦译,南京：译林出版社,2012。
③ 曼海姆,《意识形态与乌托邦》,黎鸣译,北京：商务印书馆,2005。
④ 涂尔干、莫斯,《原始分类》,汲喆译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005。
⑤ Maquet, J., The Sociology of Knowledge, Its Structure and Its Relation to the Philosophy of Knowledge:a Critical Analysis of the Systems of Karl Mannheim and Pitirim A. Sorokin., Boston, Beacon Press,1951.
① 韦伯,《社会学的基本概念》,顾忠华译,桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2005,第3页。
② Blumer, H., Symbolic Interactionism:Perspective and Method., New Jersey:Prentice-Hall.,1969, p.2.
③ 舒兹,《社会世界的现象学》,卢岚兰译,台北：桂冠图书公司,1990,第283页。
④ 伯格、卢克曼,《现实的社会构建》,汪涌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
⑤ Garfinkel, H., Studies in Ethnomethodology, N.J.:Prentice-Hall,1967. pp.269-277; 283.
① Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and Utopia:an Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge, London, K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & co., ltd.; New York, Harcourt, Brace and company.,1936, p.291.
② Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books,1966.
③ Comte, A., The Positive Philosophy, London:George Bell & Sons,1896.
④ 迪尔凯姆,《社会学方法的准则》,狄玉明译,北京：商务印书馆,1995。
⑤ 韦伯,《社会学的基本概念》,顾忠华译,广西师范大学出版社,2005。
① Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.10.
① Law, John, Power, Action, and Belief:a New Sociology of Knowledge?, London; Boston:Routledge & Kegan Paul.,1986, p.1-2.
① McCarthy, E., Knowledge as Culture:the New Sociology of Knowledge, London and New York:Routledge., 1996, p.12.
② McCarthy, E., Knowledge as Culture:the New Sociology of Knowledge, London and New York:Routledge., 1996, pp.13-20.
③ 黄瑞祺,《社会理论与社会世界》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005,第230页。
① 迪尔凯姆,《社会学方法的准则》,狄玉明译,北京：商务印书馆；涂尔干,2006,《宗教生活的基本形式》,渠东译,上海：上海人民出版社,1995。
② 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,第20页。
③ 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,第14-15页。
① 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,第40-41页。
① Mead, G, Mind, Self and Society, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1934.
② Blumer, H., Symbolic Interactionism:Perspective and Method, New Jersey:Prentice-Hall,1969.
⑤ 韦伯,《社会学的基本概念》,顾忠华译,广西师范大学出版社,2005,第3页。
① 舒兹,《社会世界的现象学》,卢岚兰译,台北：桂冠图书公司,1990,第283页。
② 伯格、卢克曼,《现实的社会构建》,汪涌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
③ Garfinkel,H.,Studies in Ethnomethodology,N.J.:Prentice-Hall,1967.
④ 苏国勋,《社会学与社会建构论》,《国外社会科学》,2002年第1期。
① 德兰逖,《社会科学：超越建构论和实在论》,张茂元译,长春：吉林人民出版社,2005,第145页。
① 曼海姆,《意识形态与乌托邦》,黎鸣译,北京：商务印书馆,2005,第11页。
① 涂尔干、莫斯,《原始分类》,汲吉译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005,第100页。
① Goff, Tom W., Marx and Mead:Contributions to a Sociology of Knowledge., London; Boston:Routledge & Kegan Paul,1980.
① 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001,第63-64页。
① Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton,1967.
① Remmling, G., Towards the Sociology of Knowledge:Origin and Development of a Sociological Thought Style; London:Routledge and Kegan Paul.,1973, p.48.
② 曼海姆,《意识形态与乌托邦》,黎鸣译,北京：商务印书馆,2005,第150、243页。
① 苏国勋、刘小枫,《社会理论的知识学建构》,上海：上海三联书店：华东师范大学出版社,2005,第402-404页。
① 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,34-35页。
② 舍勒,《知识社会学问题》,艾彦译,南京：译林出版社,2012。
③ Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.8.
① 涂尔干,《宗教生活的基本形式》,渠东译,上海：上海人民出版社,2006。
① 涂尔干,《宗教生活的基本形式》,渠东译,上海：上海人民出版社,2006。
② 涂尔干、莫斯,《原始分类》,汲喆译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005。
③ 涂尔干,《宗教生活的基本形式》,渠东译,上海：.上海人民出版社,2006,第421页。
① 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,第32页。
② 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,第32页。
③ 涂尔干、莫斯,《原始分类》,汲喆译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005,第104页。
④ 列维-斯特劳斯,《结构人类学》,张祖建译,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2006。
① 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,第7页。
② Dahlke, H.& Becker, Contemporary Social Theory, New York, London:Appleton-Century.,1940, pp.64-89.
③ Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.7.
① Stark, W., The Sociology of Knowledge, An Essay in Aid of a Deeper Understanding of the History of Ideas. Glencoe, III. The Free Press.,1958, p.45.
② Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.16.
③ Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.14.
④ Wolff, Kurt H., The sociology of knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.14.
① 兹纳涅茨基,《知识人的社会角色》,郏斌祥译,南京：译林出版社,2000,第16页。
② Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.1967, p.12.
③ Child, A., The Problem of Truth in the Sociology of Knowledge, Ethics,1947, vol.58(1):18.
④ 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001,第79页。
① Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.22.
① 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,第365-376页。
② 兹纳涅茨基,《知识人的社会角色》,郏斌祥译,南京：译林出版社,2000,第8页。
③ 兹纳涅茨基,《知识人的社会角色》,郏斌祥译,南京：译林出版社,2000,第1页。
① 科塞,《理念人：一项社会学的考察》,郭方等译,北京：中央编译出版社,2004。
② 科塞,《社会思想名家》,石人译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007,第294页。
③ Sorokin, p., Social and Cultural Dynamics (Vol I), New York:American Book Company.; Sorokin, P.,1992, The Crisis of Our Age, Oxford:One World Press,1937.
④ Maquet, J., The Sociology of Knowledge, Its Structure and ItsRelation to the Philosophy of Knowledge; a Critical Analysis of the Systems of Karl Mannheim and Pitirim A. Sorokin., Boston, Beacon Press,1951.
刘小枫,《现代性社会理论绪论：现代性与现代中国》,上海：上海三联书店,1998,第236-237页。
① 韦伯,《社会学的基本概念》,顾忠华译,广西师范大学出版社,2005,第3页。
② Mead, G., Mind, Self and Society. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.,1934, p.227.
③ Blumer, H., Symbolic Interactionism:Perspective and Method, New Jersey:Prentice-Hall.,1969, p.2.
② 舒兹,《社会世界的现象学》,卢岚兰译,台北：桂冠图书公司,1990,第283页。
③ 伯格、卢克曼,《现实的社会构建》,江涌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
① Blumer, H., Symbolic Interactionism:Perspective and Method, New Jersey:Prentice-Hall.,1969, p.153.
② Lynd, R., Knowledge for what? The Place of Social Science in American Culture, New York:Grove Press Inc, 1939.
① 舒斯特曼、李军学,《实用主义对我来说意味着什么：十条原则》,《世界哲学》,2011年第6期,第39-44页。
① 舒斯特曼、李军学,《实用主义对我来说意味着什么：十条原则》,《世界哲学》,2011年第6期,第40-41页。
② Mills, Methodological Consequences of the Sociology of Knowledge, American Jorunal of Sociology,1940, Vol.46(3), p.316.
① Goff, Tom W., Marx and Mead:Contributions to a Sociology of Knowledge., London; Boston:Routledge & Kegan Paul.,1980, p.83.
② 科塞,《社会思想名家》,石人译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007,第301页。
③ McKinney, J., The Contribution of George H. Mead to the Sociology of Knowledge, Social Forces,1955, vol. 34(2), p.149.
④ 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,第39页。
① McKinney, J., The Contribution of George H. Mead to the Sociology of Knowledge, Social Forces,1955, vol. 34(2), p.144.
② Mead, G, Mind, Self and Society, Chicago:University of Chicago Press.,1934, p.ⅩⅫ.
③ Mead, G, Mind, Self and Society, Chicago:University of Chicago Press.,1934, p.50.
① Mead, G., Mind, Self and Society, Chicago:University of Chicago Press.,1934, p.10.
② 科塞,《社会思想名家》,石人译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007,第296页。
③ Mead, G., Mind, Self and Society, Chicago:University of Chicago Press.,1934, p.81.
④ McKinney, J., The Contribution of George H. Mead to the Sociology of Knowledge, Social Forces,1955, vol. 34(2), p.144.
⑤ McKinney, J., The Contribution of George H. Mead to the Sociology of Knowledge, Social Forces,1955, vol. 34(2), p.147-148.
① 科塞,《社会思想名家》,石人译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007,第467页。
② 默顿,《社会理论和社会结构》,唐少杰、齐心等译,南京：译林出版社,2008,第548页。
③ 默顿,《社会理论和社会结构》,唐少杰、齐心等译,南京：译林出版社,2008,第550页。
④ 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,605页。
① 舒兹,《社会世界的现象学》,卢岚兰译,台北：桂冠图书公司,1990,第58页。
② 舒兹,《社会世界的现象学》,卢岚兰译,台北：桂冠图书公司,1990,第202页。
③ 伯格、卢克曼,《现实的社会构建》,汪涌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
④ 林奇,《科学实践与日常活动：常人方法论对科学的社会研究》,邢冬梅译,苏州：苏州大学出版社,2010,第29-33页。
① 柯林斯,《哲学的社会学：一种全球的学术变迁理论》(上、下卷),吴琼、齐鹏、李志红译,北京：新华出版社,2004；柯林斯,《互动仪式链》,林聚任、王鹏、宋丽君译,北京：商务印书馆,2009。
② 吉尔兹,《地方性知识：闸释人类学论文集》,王海龙、张家瑄译,北京：中央编译出版社,2000,第6页。
① 亚历山大,《社会生活的意义：一种文化社会学的视角》,周怡等译,北京：北京大学出版社,2011。
① Fuller, Social Epistemology, Bloomington and Indianapolis:Indiana University Press,1988.
② 布鲁尔,《知识和社会意象》,艾彦译,北京：东方出版社,2001,第7-8页。
③ 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001。
④ 赵万里,《科学的社会建构；科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001。
① 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001,第230页。
② 林奇,《科学实践与日常活动：常人方法论对科学的社会研究》,邢冬梅译,苏州：苏州大学出版社,2010,第323页。
① 周晓虹,《西方社会学历史与体系·第一卷：经典页献》,上海：上海人民出版社,2002,第161页。
② Collins, R., Four Sociological Traditions, New York:Oxford University Press.,1994, p.42.
③ Lynd, R., Knowledge for What? The Place of Social Science in American Culture, New York:Grove Press Inc., 1939, p.182.
① 米尔斯,《社会学的想象力》,陈强、张永强译,北京：三联书店,2001,第91页。
② 米尔斯,《社会学的想象力》,陈强、张永强译,北京：三联书店,2001,第109页。
③ Gouldner, A., The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology, New York:Basic Book Inc,1970.
④ 塞德曼,《有争议的知识：后现代时代的社会理论》,刘北成等译,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2002。
⑤ Burawoy M.,2004 Presidential Address:For Public Sociology, American Sociological Review,2005, vol.70: 4-28.
⑤ 柯林斯、马科夫斯基,《发现社会之旅：西方社会学思想述评》,李霞译,北京：中华书局,2006。
① 塞德曼,《有争议的知识：后现代时代的社会理论》,刘北成等译,北京：中国人民大学出版社,第230页,2002。
② 见刘少杰,《后现代西方社会学理论》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2002：谢立中,《走向多元话语分析：后现代思潮的社会学意涵》,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2009；谢立中,《后社会学：探索与反思》,《社会学研究》2012年1期。
① 吴小英,《女性主义知识社会学素描》,《社会理论》,2006年第2辑,第2-29页；Smith, Dorothy E., The Conceptual Practices of Power:a Feminist Sociology of Knowledge., Boston:Northeastern University Press, 1990.
[1]Abercrombie, Nicholas, Class, Structure, and Knowledge:Problems in the Sociology of Knowledge [M], Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1980.
[2]Ash, E., Expertise:Practical Knowledge and the Early Modern State.[M], Chicago:University of Chicago Press,2010.
[3]Bailey, Leon, Critical Theory and the Sociology of Knowledge:a Comparative Study in the Theory of Ideology. [M], New York:P. Lang,1994.
[4]Barber, Michael D., Social Typifications and the Elusive Other:the Place of Sociology of Knowledge in Alfred Schutz's Phenomenology.,[M], London:Associated University Presses,1988.
[5]Batty, D., Knowledge and its Organization.[M], Maryland:University of Maryland Press, 1976.
[6]Baum, Gregory, Truth Beyond Relativism:Karl Mannheim's Sociology of Knowledge. [M], Milwaukee:Marquette University Press,1977.
[7]Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge.[M], New York:Penguin Books,1966.
[8]Bloor, D., Knowledge and Social Imagery.[M], Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1991.
[9]Blumer, H., Symbolic Interactionism:Perspective and Method.[M], New Jersey:Prentice-Hall, 1969.
[10]Brandwein, P, A judicial abandonment of blacks? Rethinking the "State Action" Cases of the Waite Court.[J], Law & Society Review,2007, vol.35(2):229-242.
[11]Burawoy M.,2004 Presidential Address:For Public Sociology.[J], American Sociological Review,2005, vol.70:4-28.
[12]Child, A., The Problem of Imputation in the Sociology of Knowledge.[J], Ethics,1941a, vol. 51(2):200-219.
[13]Child, A., The Theoretical Possibilities of the Sociology of Knowledge. [J], Ethics,1941b, vol. 51(4):392-418.
[14]Child, A., The Existential Determination of Thought. [J], Ethics,1942, vol.52(2):153-185.
[15]Child, A., The Problem of Truth in the Sociology of Knowledge. [J], Ethics,1947, vol.58(1): 18-34.
[16]Chubin, D., The Conceptualization of Scientific Specialties.[J], The Sociological Quarterly, 1976, vol.17(4):448-476.
[17]Cole, J.& Harriet Zuckerman, The Emergence of a Scientific Specialty:The Self-Exemplifying Case of the Sociology of Science. [M]. In Lewis Coser (ed.), The Idea of Social Structure, pp.139-74., New York:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,1975.
[18]Collins, H., The TEA Set:Tacit Knowledge and Scientific Networks.[J], Science Studies, 1974, vol.4(2):165-185.
[19]Collins, R., Four Sociological Traditions. [M], New York:Oxford University Press,1994.
[20]Comte, A., The Positive Philosophy.[M], London:George Bell & Sons,1896.
[21]Cordoba, JR.; Farquharson, F, Enquiring into Skills Development with SSM:A South African Experience.[J], Systems Research and Behavioral Science,2008, vol.22(2):120-131.
[22]Coser, L., Sociology of Knowledge., in Sill, D., eds., International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. [M], The Macmillan Co & The Free Press, NY,1968, vol.7, pp.428-434.
[23]Craig, E., Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy.[M], London & New York:Routledge, 1998.
[24]Curtis, James E; John W Petras, The Sociology of Knowledge, a Reader.[M], New York, Praeger,1970.
[25]Dahlke, H.& Becker, Contemporary Social Theory.[M], New York, London: Appleton-Century,1940.
[26]Dalgish, G.M., Webster's Dictionary of American English.[M], New York:Random House Inc,1997.
[27]DeGre, G, The Sociology of Knowledge and the Problem of Truth. [J], Journal of the History of Ideas,1941, vol.2(1):110-115.
[28]Delanty, G., Challenging Knowledge:the University in the Knowledge Society.[M], Buckingham & Philadelphia:Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press,2001.
[29]Dong, D; Chang, TK; Chen, D, Reporting AIDS and the Invisible Victims in China:Official Knowledge as News in the People's Daily,1986-2002.[J], Journal of Health Communication, 2008, vol.25(1):81-97.
[30]Edge, David & Michael J. Mulkay, Astronomy Transformed:the Emergence of Radio Astronomy in Britain. [M], New York:John Wiley & Sons,1976.
[31]Elias, Norbert, Sociology of Knowledge:New Perspectives. [M], Oxford:Clarendon,1971.
[32]Frisby, David, The Alienated Mind:the Sociology of Knowledge in Germany 1918-33. [M], London:Heinemann Educational Books,1983.
[33]Fuller, S., Social Epistemology.[M], Bloomington and Indianapolis:Indiana University Press, 1988.
[34]Fuller S., Philosophy, Rhetoric, and the End of Knowledge:the Coming of Science and Technology Studies.[M], Madison, Wisc.:University of Wisconsin Press,1993
[35]Garfinkel, H., Studies in Ethnomethodology.[M],N. J.:Prentice-Hall,1967.
[36]Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H. et al, The New Production of Knowledge:the Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. [M], London:Sage,1994.
[37]Giddens, A., Positivism and Sociology..[M], London:Hutchinson,1974.
[38]Glennon, Lynda M., A Sociology of Knowledge Analysis of the Women's Liberation Movement.[M], New Brunswick, N. J.,1974.
[39]Glennon, Lynda M., Women and Dualism:a Sociology of Knowledge Analysis.[M], New York:Longman,1979.
[40]Goff, Tom W., Marx and Mead:Contributions to a Sociology of Knowledge. [M], London; Boston:Routledge & Kegan Paul,1980.
[41]Gouldner, A., The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology..[M], New York:Basic Book Inc, 1970.
[42]Hagstrom, W., Factors Related to the Use of Different Modes of Publishing Research in Four Scientific Fields.[M], pp.85-124 in Carnot E. Nelson and D. K. Pollock(eds.), Communication Among Scientists and Engineers. Lexington, Mass:Lexington Books,1970.
[43]Hansen, RE, Program Equity Issues in Schooling:the Testimony of Technology Teachers.[J], International Journal of Technology And Design Education,2008, Jan.2th,144-156.
[44]Hekman, Susan J., Hermeneutics and the Sociology of Knowledge..[M], Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press,1986.
[45]Karacsony, A, Soul-life-knowledge:The young Mannheim's way to sociology. [J], Studies In East European Thought,2008,18(4):724-741.
[46]Kerlin, Michael J., Crossing Berger's Fiery Brook:Religious Truth and Sociology of Knowledge.[M], Washington, D.C.:Thomist Press.,1976.
[47]Kerr, D., Barriers to Integrity:Modern Modes of Knowledge Utilization.[M], Epping: Bowker,1984.
[48]Knorr-Cetina, Karin, Scientific Communities or transepistemic arenas of research? [J], Social Studies of Science,1982, vol.12:101-130.
[49]Lankford, J., Amateurs and Astrophysics:A Neglected Aspect in the Development of A Scientific Specialty. [J], Social Studies of Science,1981, vol.11:275-303.
[50]Law, John, Power, Action, and Belief:a New Sociology of Knowledge?[M], London; Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul,1986.
[51]Leet, M., Aftereffects of Knowledge in Modernity:Politics, Aesthetics, and Individuality.[M], Albany:State University of New York Press,2004.
[52]Lynd, R., Knowledge for what? The Place of Social Science in American Culture.[M], New York:Grove Press Inc,1939.
[53]Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and utopia:an introduction to the sociology of knowledge.[M], London, K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & co., ltd.; New York, Harcourt, Brace and company,1936.
[54]Maquet, J., The Sociology of Knowledge, its Structure and Its Relation to the Philosophy of Knowledge; a Critical Analysis of the Systems of Karl Mannheim and Pitirim A. Sorokin.[M], Boston, Beacon Press,1951.
[55]McCarthy, E., Knowledge as Culture:the New Sociology of Knowledge.[M], London and New York:Routledge,1996.
[56]McKinney, J., The Contribution of George H. Mead to the Sociology of Knowledge.[J], Social Forces,1955, vol.34(2),144-9.
[57]Mead, G, Mind, Self and Society.[M], Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1934.
[58]Meja, Volker; Nico Stehr, The Sociology of Knowledge..[M], Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, M.A, USA:Edward Elgar Pub,1999.
[59]Merton, R., The Sociology of Knowledge. [M], Isis,1937, Vol.27(3):493-503.
[60]Merton, R., On Theoretical Sociology:Five Essays, Old and New.,[M], New York:Free Press, 1967.
[61]Mills, Methodological Consequences of the Sociology of Knowledge. [J], American Jorunal of Sociology,1940, vol.46(3):316-330.
[62]Mullins, N., The Development of a Scientific Specialty:the Phage Group and the Origins of Molecular Biology.[J], Minerva,1972, vol.10:52-82.
[63]Mullins, N., Theories and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology. [M], New York:Harper & Row Publishers,1973.
[64]Neisser, H., On the Sociology of Knowledge. [M], New York, J.H. Heineman,1965.
[65]Nowotny, H., Peter Scott & Michael Gibbons, Rethinking Science:Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. [M], Cambridge:Polity Press,2001.
[66]Remmling, G., Road to Suspicion; a Study of Modern Mentality and the Sociology of Knowledge. [M], New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts,1967.
[67]Remmling, G., Towards the Sociology of Knowledge:Origin and Development of a Sociological Thought Style. [M], London:Routledge and Kegan Paul,1973.
[68]Remmling, G., The Sociology of Karl Mannheim:with a Bibliographical Guide to the Sociology of Knowledge, Ideological Analysis, and Social Planning. [M], London:Routledge & K. Paul,1975.
[69]Rempel, Francis Warren, The Role of Value in Karl Mannheim's Sociology ofKnowledge.[M], The Hague, Mouton,1965.
[70]Ribeiro, R, The Language Barrier as an Aid to Communication. [J], Social Studies of Science, 33:21-41,2007.
[71]Rosser, Sue Vilhauer, Women, Science, and Society:The Crucial Union.[M], New York: Teachers College Press,2000.
[72]Sallaz, J.J.; Zavisca, J., Bourdieu in American Sociology,1980-2004. [J], Annual Review of Sociology,2007,46(2):305-354.
[73]Schwartz, Barry, Vertical Classification:a Study in Structuralism and the Sociology of Knowledge.[M], Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1981.
[74]Shanks, M, Symmetrical Archaeology. [J], World Archaeology,2007,41(2):343-386.
[75]Shrum, W., Scientific Specialties and Technical Systems.[J], Social Studies of Science,1984, vol.14:63-90.
[76]Simonds, A. P., Karl Mannheim's sociology of knowledge.[M], Oxford:Clarendon Press, 1978.
[77]Small, H., A Co-Citation Model of a Scientific Specialty:A Longitudinal Study of Collagen Research. [J], Social Studies of Science,1977, Vol.7(2):139-166.
[78]Small, H.& Henry Griffith, The Structure of Scientific Literatures I:Identifying and Graphing Specialties.[J], Science Studies,1974, Vol.4(1):17-40.
[79]Smith, Dorothy E., The Conceptual Practices of Power:a Feminist Sociology of Knowledge. [M], Boston:Northeastern University Press,1990.
[80]Sorokin, p., Social and Cultural Dynamics(Vol Ⅰ).[M], New York:American Book Company, 1937.
[81]Sorokin, P., The Crisis of Our Age. [M], Oxford:One World Press,1992.
[82]Speier, H., Book Review:Ideology and Utopia. [J], American Journal of Sociology,1937, Vol.43(1):155-166.
[83]Stark, W., The Sociology of Knowledge, An Essay in Aid of a Deeper Understanding of the History of Ideas. [M], Glencoe,Ill., The Free Press,1958.
[84]Stehr, N., Knowledge Society. [M], London:Sage,1994.
[85]Tanesini, Alessandra, An Introduction to Feminist Epistemologies:A Philosophical Introduction.[M], Oxford:Blackwell Publishers,1998.
[86]Turner, S., Social Constructivism and Social Theory.[J], Sociological Theory,1991, vol.9: 22-33.
[87]Wallerstein, I., et al., The Structures of knowledge, or, How many ways may we know? [M], New York:State University of New York at Binghamton,1996.
[88]Whitley, R., Communication Nets in Science:Status and Citation Patterns in Animal Physiology.[J], Sociological Review,1969, vol.17:219-233.
[89]Whitley, R., Black Boxism and the Sociology of Science:a Discussion of the Major Developments in the Field. [M], pp.61-92 in Paul Halmos(ed.), The Sociology of Science:The Sociological Review Monograph 18,1972.
[90]Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography.[M], The Hague:Mouton,1967.
[91]Woolgar, Steve, Knowledge and Reflexivity:New Frontiers in the Sociology of Knowledge.[M], London:Sage,1988.
[92]Yeh, N.C., A Framework for Understanding Culture and its Relationship to Information Behaviour:Taiwanese Aborigines' Information Behaviour. [J], Information Research-An International Electronic Journal,2006, vol.29(4):413-441.
[1]鲍曼,立法者与阐释者：论现代性、后现代性与知识分子[M],洪涛泽,上海：上海人民出版社,2000.
[2]贝尔纳,科学的社会功能[M],陈体芳译,北京：商务印书馆,1982.
[3]贝克,风险社会[M],何博闻泽,南京：译林出版社,2004.
[4]比彻、特罗勒尔,学术部落及其领地：知识探索与学科文化[M],唐跃勤、蒲茂华、陈洪捷译,北京：北京大学出版社,2008.
[5]伯格、卢克曼,现实的社会构建[M],汪涌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009.
[6]波丢,人：学术者[M],王作虹译,贵阳：贵州人民出版社,2006.
[7]布鲁尔,知识和社会意象[M],艾彦译,北京：东方出版社,2001.
[8]布迪厄、华康德,实践与反思：反思社会学导引[M],李猛、李康译,北京：中央编译出版社,2004.
[9]布尔迪厄,科学的社会用途：写给科学场的临床社会学[M],刘成富、张艳译,南京大学出版社,2005.
[10]布尔迪厄,科学之科学与反观性[M],陈圣生等译,南宁：广西师范大学出版社,2006.
[11]陈玉林,技术史研究的文化转向[M],沈阳：东北大学出版社,2010.
[12]丹皮尔,科学史：及其与哲学和宗教的关系[M],李珩译,北京：商务印书馆,1997.
[13]德兰迪,知识社会中的大学[M],黄建如译,北京：北京大学出版社,2010.
[14]德兰逖,社会科学：超越建构论和实在论[M],张茂元译,长春：吉林人民出版社,2005.
[15]迪尔凯姆,社会学方法的准则[M],狄玉明译,北京：商务印书馆,1995.
[16]迪尔凯姆,自杀论[M],冯韵文译,北京：商务印书馆,2001.
[17]富勒,科学的统治：开放社会的意识形态与未来[M],刘钝译,上海：上海科技教育出版社,2004.
[18]黄瑞祺,社会理论与社会世界[M],北京：北京大学出版社,2005.
[19]惠特利,科学的智力组织和社会组织[M],赵万里、陈玉林、薛晓斌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2011,
[20]胡辉华,论知识社会学的困境[J],哲学研究,2005,4：92-98.
[21]胡军,知识论[M],北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[22]吉尔兹,地方性知识：阐释人类学论文集[M],王海龙、张家瑄译,北京：中央编译出版社,2000.
[23]金岳霖,知识论[M],北京：商务印书馆,1983.
[24]卡则纳弗,社会学十大概念[M],杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011.
[25]克兰,无形学院：知识在科学共同体的扩散[M],刘珺珺、顾昕、王德禄译,北京：华夏出版社,1988.
[26]柯林斯,哲学的社会学：一种全球的学术变迁理论(上、下卷)[M],吴琼、齐鹏、李志红译,北京：新华出版社,2004.
[27]柯林斯,互动仪式链[M],林聚任、王鹏、宋丽君译,北京：商务印书馆,2009.
[28]柯林斯、马科夫斯基,发现社会之旅：西方社会学思想述评[M],李霞译,北京：中华书局,2006.
[29]科塞,理念人：一项社会学的考察[M],郭方等译,北京：中央编译出版社,2004.
[30]科塞,社会思想名家[M],石人译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007.
[31]库恩,科学革命的结构[M],金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003.
[32]库恩,哥白尼革命：西方思想发展中的行星天文学[M],吴国盛等译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003.
[33]库恩,必要的张力[M],范岱年、纪树立译,北京：北京大学出版社,2004.
[34]库恩,结构之后的路[M],邱慧译,北京：北京大学出版社,2012.
[35]利奥塔尔,后现代状态：关于知识的报告[M],车槿山译,北京：三联书店,1997.
[36]列维-斯特劳斯,结构人类学[M],张祖建译,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2006.
[37]林奇,科学实践与日常活动：常人方法论对科学的社会研究[M],邢冬梅译,苏州：苏州大学出版社,2010.
[38]刘小枫,现代性社会理论绪论：现代性与现代中国[M],上海：上海三联书店,1998.
[39]刘少杰,后现代西方社会学理论[M],北京：社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[40]刘文旋,知识的社会性：知识社会学概要[J],哲学动态,2002,1：42-45.
[41]马尔凯,科学与知识社会学[M],林聚任等译,北京：东方出版社,2001.
[42]曼海姆,意识形态与乌托邦[M],黎鸣译,北京：商务印书馆,2005.
[43]米尔斯,社会学的想象力[M],陈强、张永强译,北京：三联书店,2001.
[44]默顿,论理论社会学[M],何凡兴、李卫红、王丽娟译,北京：华夏出版社,1990.
[45]默顿,十七世纪英格兰的科学、技术与社会[M],范岱年等译,北京：商务印书馆,2000.
[46]默顿,科学社会学散忆[M],鲁旭东译,北京：商务印书馆,2004.
[47]默顿,社会理论和社会结构[M],唐少杰、齐心等译,南京：译林出版社,2008.
[48]默顿,科学社会学[M],鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010.
[49]普赖斯,小科学、大科学[M],宋剑耕、戴振飞译,北京：世界科学出版社,1982.
[50]萨顿,科学史和新人文主义[M],陈恒六、刘兵、朱维光译,北京：华夏出版社,1989.
[51]塞德曼,有争议的知识：后现代时代的社会理论[M],刘北成等译,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2002.
[52]舍勒,知识社会学问题[M],艾彦译,南京：译林出版社,2012.
[53]舒斯特曼、李军学,实用主义对我来说意味着什么：十条原则[J],世界哲学,2011,6：39-44.
[54]舒炜光、邱仁宗,当代西方科学哲学书评(2版)[M],北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007.
[55]舒兹,社会世界的现象学[M],卢岚兰译,台北：桂冠图书公司,1990.
[56]斯宾格勒,西方的没落[M],齐世荣、田农、林传鼎等译,北京：商务印书馆,1991.
[57]苏国勋,社会学与社会建构论[J],国外社会科学,2002,1：4-13.
[58]苏国勋、刘小枫,社会理论的知识学建构[M],上海：上海三联书店；华东师范大学出版社,2005.
[59]涂尔干,宗教生活的基本形式[M],渠东译,上海：上海人民出版社,2006.
[60]涂尔干、莫斯,原始分类[M],汲喆译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005.
[61]韦伯,社会学的基本概念[M],顾忠华译,桂林,广西师范大学出版社,2005.
[62]吴小英,女性主义知识社会学素描[J],社会理论,2006,2：2-29.
[63]谢立中,走向多元话语分析：后现代思潮的社会学意涵[M],北京：中国人民大学出版社,2009.
[64]谢立中,后社会学：探索与反思[J],社会学研究,2012,1：1-26.
[65]亚历山大,社会生活的意义：一种文化社会学的视角[M],周怡等译,北京：北京人学出版社,2011.
[66]赵万里,科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践[M],天津,天津人民出版社,2001.
[67]赵万里、徐敬怡,符号互动论视野下的科学社会研究[J],自然辩证法通讯,2007,6：47-53.
[68]赵万里、赵超,生成图式与反思理性：解析布迪厄的知识社会学理论[J],社会,2012,2：33-50.
[69]郑丹,默顿一般社会学理论与其科学社会学理论的关系[J],科学文化评论,2007,1：53-73.
[70]周晓虹,西方社会学历史与体系·第一卷：经典贡献[M],上海：上海人民出版社,2002.
[71]兹纳涅茨基,知识人的社会角色[M],郏斌祥译,南京：译林出版社,2000.
② 其它学者对于“学科”概念的阐释,见比彻、特罗勒尔,《学术部落及其领地：知识探索与学科文化》,唐跃勤、蒲茂华、陈洪捷译,北京：北京大学出版社,2008,43页。Chubin, D., The Conceptualization of Scientific Specialties, The Sociological Quarterly,1976, vol.17(4):450.
① Bloor, D., Knowledge and Social Imagery., Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1991, p.46.
② 布迪厄、华康德,《实践与反思：反思社会学导引》,李猛、李康译,北京：中央编译出版社,2004。
① 检索主页：http://www.worldcat.org/advancedsearch,关键字："sociology of knowledge".图书检索：格式：图书,文种：英语。学位论文检索：内容：硕士论文/博士论文,文种：英语。以上检索均在检索后去除重复文献所得,后文中的中文检索遵循相同方法。检索日期：2011-9-20。
① Speier, H., Book Review:Ideology and Utopia, American Journal of Sociology,1937, vol.43(1):155-166.
① DeGre, G., The Sociology of Knowledge and the Problem of Truth, Journal of the History of Ideas,1941, vol. 2(1):110-115.
② Child, A., The Problem of Imputation in the Sociology of Knowledge, Ethics,1941a, vol.51(2):200-219
③ Child, A., The Theoretical Possibilities of the Sociology of Knowledge, Ethics,1941b, vol.51(4):392-418.
④ Child, A., The Existential Determination of Thought, Ethics,1942, vol.52(2):153-185.
⑤ Child, A., The Problem of Truth in the Sociology of Knowledge, Ethics,1947, vol.58(1):18-34.
⑥ Merton, R., The Sociology of Knowledge., Isis,1937, vol.27(3):493-503.
⑦ Mills, Methodological Consequences of the Sociology of Knowledge, American Jorunal of Sociology,1940, vol. 46(3):316-330.
⑧ Wolff, Kurt H, The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography, The Hague:Mouton,1967.
① Stark, W., The Sociology of Knowledge, An Essay in Aid of a Deeper Understanding of the History of Ideas. Glencoe, Ill. The Free Press,1958.
② Maquet, Jacques Jerome Pierre, The Sociology of Knowledge, its Structure and its Relation to the Philosophy of Knowledge; a Critical Analysis of the Systems of Karl Mannheim and Pitirim A. Sorokin., Boston, Beacon Press, 1951.
* Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books,1966.
④ Neisser, H, On the Sociology of Knowledge, New York, J.H. Heineman,1965.
⑤ Elias, Norbert, Sociology of Knowledge:New Perspectives, Oxford:Clarendon,1971.
⑥ Remmling, G., Towards the Sociology of Knowledge:Origin and Development of a Sociological Thought Style; London:Routledge and Kegan Paul,1973.
⑦ Frisby, David, The Alienated Mind:the Sociology of Knowledge in Germany 1918-33. London:Heinemann Educational Books,1983.
① Remmling, G., Road to Suspicion; a Study of Modern Mentality and the Sociology of Knowledge. New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts,1967.
② Woolgar, Steve, Knowledge and Reflexivity:New Frontiers in the Sociology of Knowledge., London:Sage, 1988.
③ Hekman, Susan J., Hermeneutics and the Sociology of Knowledge., Notre Dame, Ind.:University of Notre Dame Press,1986.
④ Bailey, Leon, Critical Theory and the Sociology of Knowledge:a Comparative Study in the Theory of Ideology. New York:P.Lang,1994.
⑤ Schwartz, Barry, Vertical Classification:a Study in Structuralism and the Sociology of Knowledge., Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1981.
⑥ Rempel, Francis Warren, The Role of Value in Karl Mannheim's Sociology of Knowledge, The Hague, Mouton, 1965.
⑦ Simonds, A. P., Karl Mannheim's Sociology of Knowledge., Oxford:Clarendon Press,1978.
⑧ Remmling, G., The Sociology of Karl Mannheim:with a Bibliographical Guide to the Sociology of Knowledge, Ideological Analysis, and Social Planning., London:Routledge & K. Paul,1975.
⑨ Baum, Gregory, Truth Beyond Relativism:Karl Mannheim's Sociology of Knowledge. Milwaukee:Marquette University Press,1977.
⑩ Longhurst, Brian, Karl Mannheim and the Contemporary Sociology of Knowledge., New York:St. Martin's Press,1989.
① Kerlin, Michael J., Crossing Berger's Fiery Brook:Religious Truth and Sociology of Knowledge., Washington, D.C.:Thomist Press,1976.
② Barber, Michael D., Social Typifications and the Elusive Other:the Place of Sociology of Knowledge in Alfred Schutz's Phenomenology., London:Associated University Presses,1988.
① Abercrombie, Nicholas, Class, Structure, and Knowledge:Problems in the Sociology of Knowledge., Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1980.
② Law, John, Power, Action, and Belief:a New Sociology of Knowledge?, London; Boston:Routledge & Kegan Paul,1986.
③ Meja, Volker; Nico Stehr, Knowledge and Politics:the Sociology of Knowledge Dispute., London; New York: Routledge,1990.
④ Batty, D., Knowledge and its Organization, Maryland:University of Maryland Press,1976.
⑤ Kerr, D., Barriers to Integrity:Modern Modes of Knowledge Utilization, Epping:Bowker,1984.
⑥ Nowotny, H., Peter Scott & Michael Gibbons, Rethinking Science:Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty, Cambridge:Polity Press,2001.
⑦ Delanty, G, Challenging Knowledge:the University in the Knowledge Society, Buckingham & Philadelphia: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press,2001.
⑧ Leet, M., Aftereffects of Knowledge in Modernity:Politics, Aesthetics, and Individuality., Albany:State University of New York Press,2004.
⑨ Ash, E., Expertise:practical knowledge and the early modern state., Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 2010.
① Glennon, L., A Sociology of Knowledge Analysis of the Women's Liberation Movement., New Brunswick, N. J.; Glennon, L.,1979, Women and Dualism.:a Sociology of Knowledge Analysis., New York:Longman,1974.
② Tanesini, Alessandra, An Introduction to Feminist Epistemologies:A Philosophical Introduction., Oxford: Blackwell Publishers,1998.
③ Rosser, Sue Vilhauer, Women, Science, and Society:The Crucial Union., New York:Teachers College Press, 2000.
① Shanks, M, Symmetrical Archaeology, World Archaeology,2007, vol.41(2):343-386.
① Karacsony, A, Soul-life-knowledge:The Young Mannheim's Way to Sociology, Studies in East European Thought,2008, vol.18(4):724-741.
② Sallaz, JJ; Zavisca, J, Bourdieu in American Sociology,1980-2004, Annual Review of Sociology,2007, vol. 46(2):305-354.
③ Dong, D; Chang, TK; Chen, D, Reporting AIDS and the Invisible Victims in China:Official Knowledge as News in the People's Daily,1986-2002, Journal of Health Communication,2008, vol.25(1):81-97.
④ Cordoba, JR; Farquharson, F, Enquiring into Skills Development with SSM:A South African Experience, 'Systems Research and Behavioral Science,2008, vol.22(2):120-131.
⑤ Hansen, RE, Program Equity Issues in Schooling:The Testimony of Technology Teachers, International Journal Of Technology And Design Education,2008, Jan.2th,144-156.
⑥ Brandwein, P, A Judicial Abandonment of Blacks? Rethinking the "State Action" Cases of the Waite Court, Law & Society Review,2007, vol.35(2):229-242.
⑦ Ribeiro, R, The Language Barrier as an Aid to Communication, Social Studies of Science,2007, vol.33:21-41.
⑧ Yeh, NC, A Framework for Understanding Culture and its Relationship to Information Behaviour:Taiwanese Aborigines' Information Behaviour, Information Research-An International Electronic Journal,2006, vol.29(4): 413-441.
① 舒炜光、邱仁宗,《当代西方科学哲学书评(2版)》,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,第3页。
② 萨顿,《科学史和新人文主义》,陈恒六、刘兵、朱维光译,北京：华夏出版社,1989,第1、3页。
③ 丹皮尔,《科学史：及其与哲学和宗教的关系》,李珩译,北京：商务印书馆,1997,第2页。
① 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001。
② 陈玉林,《技术史研究的文化转向》,沈阳：东北大学出版社,2010。
① 贝尔纳,《科学的社会功能》,陈体芳译,北京：商务印书馆,1982。
② 默顿,《十七世纪英格兰的科学、技术与社会》,范岱年等译,北京：商务印书馆,2000。
① 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,第365-376页,2010。
② 郑丹,《默顿一般社会学理论与其科学社会学理论的关系》,《科学文化评论》,2007年第1期,57页。
① Cole, J.& Harriet Zuckerman, The Emergence of a Scientific Specialty:The Self-Exemplifying Case of the Sociology of Science. In Lewis Coser (ed.). The Idea of Social Structure,1975, pp.160-162., New York:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
② 默顿,《科学社会学散忆》,鲁旭东译,北京：商务印书馆,2004,第8-9页。
③ 默顿,《科学社会学散忆》,鲁旭东译,北京：商务印书馆,2004,第82页。
① 普赖斯,《小科学、大科学》,宋剑耕、戴振飞译,北京：世界科学出版社,1982,第8-9页。
② 克兰,《无形学院：知识在科学共同体的扩散》,刘珺珺、顾昕、王德禄译,1988,北京：华夏出版社,第2页。
③ 克兰,《无形学院：知识在科学共同体的扩散》,刘珺珺、顾听、王德禄译,1988,北京：华夏出版社,第36-37页。
① 克兰,《无形学院：知识在科学共同体的扩散》,刘珺珺、顾昕、王德禄译,北京：华夏出版社,1988,第36-37页。
② 转引自克兰,《无形学院：知识在科学共同体的扩散》,刘珺珺、顾昕、王德禄译,北京：华夏出版社,1988,第149页。
③ Small, H., A Co-Citation Model of a Scientific Specialty:A Longitudinal Study of Collagen Research., Social Studies of Science,1977, Vol.7(2):139-166.; Small, H.& Henry Griffith, The Structure of Scientific Literatures I: Identifying and Graphing Specialties., Science Studies,1974, vol.4(1):17-40.
④ Mullins, N., The Development of a Scientific Specialty:the Phage Group and the Origins of Molecular Biology., Minerva,1972, vol.10:52-82.; Mullins, N., Theories and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology. New York:Harper & Row Publishers,1973.
⑤ Chubin, D., The Conceptualization of Scientific Specialties, The Sociological Quarterly,1976, vol.17(4): 448-476.
① Edge, David & Michael J. Mulkay, Astronomy Transformed:the Emergence of Radio Astronomy in Britain., New York:John Wiley & Sons,1976.
② Collins, H., The TEA Set:Tacit Knowledge and Scientific Networks, Science Studies,1974, vol.4(2):165-185.
③ Lankford, J., Amateurs and Astrophysics:A Neglected Aspect in the Development of a Scientific Specialty., Social Studies of Science,1981, vol.11:275-303.
④ Shrum, W., Scientific Specialties and Technical Systems., Social Studies of Science,1984, vol.14:63-90.
⑤ Chubin, D., The Conceptualization of Scientific Specialties, The Sociological Quarterly,1976. vol.17(4):449.
⑥ Shrum, W., Scientific Specialties and Technical Systems., Social Studies of Science,1984, vol.14:63.
① Small, H.& Henry Griffith, The Structure of Scientific Literatures l:Identifying and Graphing Specialties., Science Studies,1974, vol.4(1):19.
② Merton, R., On Theoretical Sociology:Five Essays. Old and New. New York:Free Press,1967, p.27.
① 富勒,《科学的统治：开放社会的意识形态与未来》,刘钝译,上海：上海科技教育出版社,2004,第125页。
② Mullins, N., The Development of a Scientific Specialty:the Phage Group and the Origins of Molecular Biology., Minerva,1972, vol.10:54.
③ Mullins, N., Theories and Theory Croups in Contemporary American Sociology. New York:Harper & Row Publishers,1973, pp.20-25.
① 下表转引自Mullins, N., Theories and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology. New York: Harper & Row Publishers,1973, p.28.
① Mullins, N., Theories and Theory Croups in Contemporary American Sociology. New York:Harper & Row Publishers,1973, pp.29-30.
① Knorr-Cetina, Karin, Scientific Communities or transepistemic arenas of research?, Social Studies of Science, 1982, vol.12:101-130.
① Turner, S., Social Constructivism and Social Theory., Sociological Theory,1991, vol.9:pp.27-28.
② Whitley, R., Communication Nets in Science:Status and Citation Patterns in Animal Physiology., Sociological Review,1969, vol.17:219-233.; Whitley, R., Black Boxism and the Sociology of Science:a Discussion of the Major Developments in the Field, pp.61-92 in Paul Halmos(ed.), The Sociology of Science. The Sociological Review, Monograph 18,1972.
③ 惠特利,《科学的智力组织和社会组织》,赵万里、陈玉林、薛晓斌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2011。
① 舒炜光、邱仁宗,《当代西方科学哲学书评(2版)》,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,第20页。
① 迪尔凯姆,《自杀论》,冯韵文译,北京：商务印书馆,2001。
② 伯格、卢克曼,《现实的社会构建》,汪涌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
① 舒炜光、邱仁宗,《当代西方科学哲学书评(2版)》,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,第156页。
② 舒炜光、邱仁宗,《当代西方科学哲学书评(2版)》,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,第93页。
① 默顿,《论理论社会学》,何凡兴、李卫红、王丽娟译,北京：华夏出版社,1990,第94页。
② 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第9页。
③ 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第157页。
① 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第22页。
② 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第31-32页。
③ 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第60页。
① 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第101页。
② 除《科学革命的结构》外,这些分析也可见库恩的其他作品：库恩,《哥白尼革命：西方思想发展中的行星天文学》,吴国盛等译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003：库恩,《结构之后的路》,邱慧译,北京：北京大学出版社,2012。
① 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第136、140页。
② 库恩,《必要的张力》,范岱年、纪树立译,北京：北京大学出版社,2004,第290页。
① 舒炜光、邱仁宗,《当代西方科学哲学书评(2版)》,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,第184页。
② 库恩,《科学革命的结构》,金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003,第101页。
Giddens, A., Positivism and Sociology., London:Hutchinson.,1974, p. IX.
② 赵万里、徐敬怡,《符号互动论视野下的科学社会研究》,《自然辩证法通讯》,2007年第6期,47-53页。
③ 林奇,《科学实践与日常活动：常人方法论对科学的社会研究》,邢冬梅译,苏州：苏州大学出版社,2010。
① 布鲁尔,《知识和社会意象》,艾彦译,北京：东方出版社,2001,第7页。
② 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001,第142页。
③ 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001,第150页。
① 布迪厄、华康德,《实践与反思：反思社会学导引》,李猛、李康译,北京：中央编译出版社,2004。
② 关于布迪厄的知识社会学思想,见赵万里、赵超,《生成图式与反思理性：解析布迪厄的知识社会学理论》,《社会》2012年第2期,33-50页。
③ 布尔迪厄,《科学之科学与反观性》,陈圣生等译,南宁：广西师范大学出版社,2006,第57-58页。
① 赵万里、赵超,《生成图式与反思理性：解析布迪厄的知识社会学理论》,《社会》2012年第2期,44页。
② 赵万里、赵超,《生成图式与反思理性：解析布迪厄的知识社会学理论》,《社会》2012年第2期,44页。
③ 布尔迪厄,《科学之科学与反观性》,陈圣生等译,南宁：广西师范大学出版社,2006,第70页。
④ 布尔迪厄,《科学的社会用途：写给科学场的临床社会学》,刘成富、张艳译,南京大学出版社,2005,第36页。
⑤ 波丢,《人：学术者》,王作虹译,贵阳：贵州人民出版社,2006,第44页。
① 波丢,《人：学术者》,王作虹译,贵阳：贵州人民出版社,2006,第69页。图2.2为作者总结。
② 波丢,《人：学术者》,王作虹译,贵阳：贵州人民出版社,2006,第71页。
① 惠特利,《科学的智力组织和社会组织》,赵万里、陈玉林、薛晓斌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2011,第91页。
① 惠特利,《科学的智力组织和社会组织》,赵万里、陈玉林、薛晓斌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2011,第115页。
① 转引自惠特利,《科学的智力组织和社会组织》,赵万里、陈玉林、薛晓斌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2011,第150页。
心相关论述见Stehr, N., Knowledge Society. London:Sage,1994德兰迪,《知识社会中的大学》,黄建如译,北京：北京大学出版社,2010。
② 利奥塔尔,《后现代状态：关于知识的报告》,车槿山译,北京：三联书店,1997。
③ 贝克,《风险社会》,何博闻译,南京：译林出版社,2004。
④ 鲍曼,《立法者与阐释者：论现代性、后现代性与知识分子》,洪涛译,上海：上海人民出版社,2000。
⑤ Gibbons, M., Limoges, C, Nowotny, H. et al, The New Production of Knowledge:the Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London:Sage,1994.
① Fuller, Philosophy, Rhetoric, and the End of Knowledge:the Coming of Science and Technology Studies., Madison, Wisc.:University of Wisconsin Press,1993.; Wallerstein, I., et al., The Structures of Knowledge, or, How Many Ways May We Know? New York:State University of New York at Binghamton,1996.
② 德兰迪,《知识社会中的大学》,黄建如译,北京：北京大学出版社,2010,第125页。
① 德兰迪,《知识社会中的大学》,黄建如译,北京：北京大学出版社,2010,第125页。
② 德兰迪,《知识社会中的大学》,黄建如译,北京：北京大学出版社,2010,第4、125页。
① Meja, Volker; Nico Stehr, The Sociology of Knowledge., Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA, USA:Edward Elgar Pub.,1999, p. XIII.
② McCarthy, E., Knowledge as Culture:the New Sociology of Knowledge, London and New York:Routledge., 1996,p.1.
③ Curtis, James E; John W Petras, The Sociology of Knowledge, a Reader, New York, Praeger.,1970, p.261.
④ Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books.,1966, p.16.
① 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,第63页。
② Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books.,1966, p.15.
③ 金岳霖,《知识论》,北京：商务印书馆,1983,第1页。
④ 默顿,《社会理论和社会结构》,唐少杰、齐心等译,南京：译林出版社,2008,第592页。
③ Curtis, James E; John W Petras, The Sociology of Knowledge, a Reader., New York, Praeger.,1970, p.7.
① 马尔凯,《科学与知识社会学》,林聚任等译,北京：东方出版社,2001,第3页。
② 胡军,《知识论》,北京：北京大学出版社,2006,第52页。
③ 涂尔干、莫斯,,《原始分类》,汲喆译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005,第102-104页。
① Mead, G., Mind, Self and Society. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1934.; Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books,1966.
② 胡辉华,《论知识社会学的困境》,《哲学研究》,2005年第4期,第92页。
③ 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,第30页。
① 刘文旋,《知识的社会性：知识社会学概要》,《哲学动态》,2002年第1期,第45页。
① 斯宾格勒,《西方的没落》,齐世荣、田农、林传鼎等译,北京：商务印书馆,1991。
② Frisby, David, The Alienated Mind:the Sociology of Knowledge in Germany 1918-33. London:Heinemann Educational Books,1983. p.1.
① Hagstrom, W., Factors Related to the Use of Different Modes of Publishing Research in Four Scientific Fields., pp.85-124 in Carnot E. Nelson and D. K. Pollock(eds.), Communication Among Scientists and Engineers. Lexington, Mass:Lexington Books.,1970, pp.91-93.
② Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books,1966.
① 布迪厄、华康德,《实践与反思：反思社会学导引》,李猛、李康译,北京：中央编译出版社,2004,第101-102页。
① Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books.,1966, p.16.
② Wolff, Kurt H, The sociology of knowledge in the United States of America:a trend report and bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.5.
③ Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and Utopia:an Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge, London, K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & co., ltd.; New York, Harcourt, Brace and company.,1936, p.237.
④ Coser, L., Sociology of Knowledge., in Sill, D., eds., International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, The Macmillan Co & The Free Press, N.Y.,1968, vol.7, p.428.
① Craig, E., Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy., London & New York:Routledge.,1998, p.1.
② Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.8.
③ Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge New York:Penguin Books.,1966, p.25.
① Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and Utopia:an Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge, London, K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & co., ltd.; New York, Harcourt, Brace and company.,1936, p. XXXI.
② Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.20.
① 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,第29页。
② 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,14-15页。
① 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,第24页。
② 舍勒,《知识社会学问题》,艾彦译,南京：译林出版社,2012。
③ 曼海姆,《意识形态与乌托邦》,黎鸣译,北京：商务印书馆,2005。
④ 涂尔干、莫斯,《原始分类》,汲喆译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005。
⑤ Maquet, J., The Sociology of Knowledge, Its Structure and Its Relation to the Philosophy of Knowledge:a Critical Analysis of the Systems of Karl Mannheim and Pitirim A. Sorokin., Boston, Beacon Press,1951.
① 韦伯,《社会学的基本概念》,顾忠华译,桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2005,第3页。
② Blumer, H., Symbolic Interactionism:Perspective and Method., New Jersey:Prentice-Hall.,1969, p.2.
③ 舒兹,《社会世界的现象学》,卢岚兰译,台北：桂冠图书公司,1990,第283页。
④ 伯格、卢克曼,《现实的社会构建》,汪涌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
⑤ Garfinkel, H., Studies in Ethnomethodology, N.J.:Prentice-Hall,1967. pp.269-277; 283.
① Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and Utopia:an Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge, London, K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & co., ltd.; New York, Harcourt, Brace and company.,1936, p.291.
② Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York:Penguin Books,1966.
③ Comte, A., The Positive Philosophy, London:George Bell & Sons,1896.
④ 迪尔凯姆,《社会学方法的准则》,狄玉明译,北京：商务印书馆,1995。
⑤ 韦伯,《社会学的基本概念》,顾忠华译,广西师范大学出版社,2005。
① Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.10.
① Law, John, Power, Action, and Belief:a New Sociology of Knowledge?, London; Boston:Routledge & Kegan Paul.,1986, p.1-2.
① McCarthy, E., Knowledge as Culture:the New Sociology of Knowledge, London and New York:Routledge., 1996, p.12.
② McCarthy, E., Knowledge as Culture:the New Sociology of Knowledge, London and New York:Routledge., 1996, pp.13-20.
③ 黄瑞祺,《社会理论与社会世界》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005,第230页。
① 迪尔凯姆,《社会学方法的准则》,狄玉明译,北京：商务印书馆；涂尔干,2006,《宗教生活的基本形式》,渠东译,上海：上海人民出版社,1995。
② 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,第20页。
③ 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,第14-15页。
① 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,第40-41页。
① Mead, G, Mind, Self and Society, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1934.
② Blumer, H., Symbolic Interactionism:Perspective and Method, New Jersey:Prentice-Hall,1969.
⑤ 韦伯,《社会学的基本概念》,顾忠华译,广西师范大学出版社,2005,第3页。
① 舒兹,《社会世界的现象学》,卢岚兰译,台北：桂冠图书公司,1990,第283页。
② 伯格、卢克曼,《现实的社会构建》,汪涌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
③ Garfinkel,H.,Studies in Ethnomethodology,N.J.:Prentice-Hall,1967.
④ 苏国勋,《社会学与社会建构论》,《国外社会科学》,2002年第1期。
① 德兰逖,《社会科学：超越建构论和实在论》,张茂元译,长春：吉林人民出版社,2005,第145页。
① 曼海姆,《意识形态与乌托邦》,黎鸣译,北京：商务印书馆,2005,第11页。
① 涂尔干、莫斯,《原始分类》,汲吉译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005,第100页。
① Goff, Tom W., Marx and Mead:Contributions to a Sociology of Knowledge., London; Boston:Routledge & Kegan Paul,1980.
① 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001,第63-64页。
① Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton,1967.
① Remmling, G., Towards the Sociology of Knowledge:Origin and Development of a Sociological Thought Style; London:Routledge and Kegan Paul.,1973, p.48.
② 曼海姆,《意识形态与乌托邦》,黎鸣译,北京：商务印书馆,2005,第150、243页。
① 苏国勋、刘小枫,《社会理论的知识学建构》,上海：上海三联书店：华东师范大学出版社,2005,第402-404页。
① 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,34-35页。
② 舍勒,《知识社会学问题》,艾彦译,南京：译林出版社,2012。
③ Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.8.
① 涂尔干,《宗教生活的基本形式》,渠东译,上海：上海人民出版社,2006。
① 涂尔干,《宗教生活的基本形式》,渠东译,上海：上海人民出版社,2006。
② 涂尔干、莫斯,《原始分类》,汲喆译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005。
③ 涂尔干,《宗教生活的基本形式》,渠东译,上海：.上海人民出版社,2006,第421页。
① 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,第32页。
② 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,第32页。
③ 涂尔干、莫斯,《原始分类》,汲喆译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005,第104页。
④ 列维-斯特劳斯,《结构人类学》,张祖建译,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2006。
① 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,第7页。
② Dahlke, H.& Becker, Contemporary Social Theory, New York, London:Appleton-Century.,1940, pp.64-89.
③ Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.7.
① Stark, W., The Sociology of Knowledge, An Essay in Aid of a Deeper Understanding of the History of Ideas. Glencoe, III. The Free Press.,1958, p.45.
② Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.16.
③ Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.14.
④ Wolff, Kurt H., The sociology of knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.14.
① 兹纳涅茨基,《知识人的社会角色》,郏斌祥译,南京：译林出版社,2000,第16页。
② Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.1967, p.12.
③ Child, A., The Problem of Truth in the Sociology of Knowledge, Ethics,1947, vol.58(1):18.
④ 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001,第79页。
① Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography. The Hague:Mouton.,1967, p.22.
① 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,第365-376页。
② 兹纳涅茨基,《知识人的社会角色》,郏斌祥译,南京：译林出版社,2000,第8页。
③ 兹纳涅茨基,《知识人的社会角色》,郏斌祥译,南京：译林出版社,2000,第1页。
① 科塞,《理念人：一项社会学的考察》,郭方等译,北京：中央编译出版社,2004。
② 科塞,《社会思想名家》,石人译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007,第294页。
③ Sorokin, p., Social and Cultural Dynamics (Vol I), New York:American Book Company.; Sorokin, P.,1992, The Crisis of Our Age, Oxford:One World Press,1937.
④ Maquet, J., The Sociology of Knowledge, Its Structure and ItsRelation to the Philosophy of Knowledge; a Critical Analysis of the Systems of Karl Mannheim and Pitirim A. Sorokin., Boston, Beacon Press,1951.
刘小枫,《现代性社会理论绪论：现代性与现代中国》,上海：上海三联书店,1998,第236-237页。
① 韦伯,《社会学的基本概念》,顾忠华译,广西师范大学出版社,2005,第3页。
② Mead, G., Mind, Self and Society. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.,1934, p.227.
③ Blumer, H., Symbolic Interactionism:Perspective and Method, New Jersey:Prentice-Hall.,1969, p.2.
② 舒兹,《社会世界的现象学》,卢岚兰译,台北：桂冠图书公司,1990,第283页。
③ 伯格、卢克曼,《现实的社会构建》,江涌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
① Blumer, H., Symbolic Interactionism:Perspective and Method, New Jersey:Prentice-Hall.,1969, p.153.
② Lynd, R., Knowledge for what? The Place of Social Science in American Culture, New York:Grove Press Inc, 1939.
① 舒斯特曼、李军学,《实用主义对我来说意味着什么：十条原则》,《世界哲学》,2011年第6期,第39-44页。
① 舒斯特曼、李军学,《实用主义对我来说意味着什么：十条原则》,《世界哲学》,2011年第6期,第40-41页。
② Mills, Methodological Consequences of the Sociology of Knowledge, American Jorunal of Sociology,1940, Vol.46(3), p.316.
① Goff, Tom W., Marx and Mead:Contributions to a Sociology of Knowledge., London; Boston:Routledge & Kegan Paul.,1980, p.83.
② 科塞,《社会思想名家》,石人译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007,第301页。
③ McKinney, J., The Contribution of George H. Mead to the Sociology of Knowledge, Social Forces,1955, vol. 34(2), p.149.
④ 卡则纳弗,《社会学十大概念》,杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011,第39页。
① McKinney, J., The Contribution of George H. Mead to the Sociology of Knowledge, Social Forces,1955, vol. 34(2), p.144.
② Mead, G, Mind, Self and Society, Chicago:University of Chicago Press.,1934, p.ⅩⅫ.
③ Mead, G, Mind, Self and Society, Chicago:University of Chicago Press.,1934, p.50.
① Mead, G., Mind, Self and Society, Chicago:University of Chicago Press.,1934, p.10.
② 科塞,《社会思想名家》,石人译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007,第296页。
③ Mead, G., Mind, Self and Society, Chicago:University of Chicago Press.,1934, p.81.
④ McKinney, J., The Contribution of George H. Mead to the Sociology of Knowledge, Social Forces,1955, vol. 34(2), p.144.
⑤ McKinney, J., The Contribution of George H. Mead to the Sociology of Knowledge, Social Forces,1955, vol. 34(2), p.147-148.
① 科塞,《社会思想名家》,石人译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007,第467页。
② 默顿,《社会理论和社会结构》,唐少杰、齐心等译,南京：译林出版社,2008,第548页。
③ 默顿,《社会理论和社会结构》,唐少杰、齐心等译,南京：译林出版社,2008,第550页。
④ 默顿,《科学社会学》,鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010,605页。
① 舒兹,《社会世界的现象学》,卢岚兰译,台北：桂冠图书公司,1990,第58页。
② 舒兹,《社会世界的现象学》,卢岚兰译,台北：桂冠图书公司,1990,第202页。
③ 伯格、卢克曼,《现实的社会构建》,汪涌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
④ 林奇,《科学实践与日常活动：常人方法论对科学的社会研究》,邢冬梅译,苏州：苏州大学出版社,2010,第29-33页。
① 柯林斯,《哲学的社会学：一种全球的学术变迁理论》(上、下卷),吴琼、齐鹏、李志红译,北京：新华出版社,2004；柯林斯,《互动仪式链》,林聚任、王鹏、宋丽君译,北京：商务印书馆,2009。
② 吉尔兹,《地方性知识：闸释人类学论文集》,王海龙、张家瑄译,北京：中央编译出版社,2000,第6页。
① 亚历山大,《社会生活的意义：一种文化社会学的视角》,周怡等译,北京：北京大学出版社,2011。
① Fuller, Social Epistemology, Bloomington and Indianapolis:Indiana University Press,1988.
② 布鲁尔,《知识和社会意象》,艾彦译,北京：东方出版社,2001,第7-8页。
③ 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001。
④ 赵万里,《科学的社会建构；科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001。
① 赵万里,《科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践》,天津,天津人民出版社,2001,第230页。
② 林奇,《科学实践与日常活动：常人方法论对科学的社会研究》,邢冬梅译,苏州：苏州大学出版社,2010,第323页。
① 周晓虹,《西方社会学历史与体系·第一卷：经典页献》,上海：上海人民出版社,2002,第161页。
② Collins, R., Four Sociological Traditions, New York:Oxford University Press.,1994, p.42.
③ Lynd, R., Knowledge for What? The Place of Social Science in American Culture, New York:Grove Press Inc., 1939, p.182.
① 米尔斯,《社会学的想象力》,陈强、张永强译,北京：三联书店,2001,第91页。
② 米尔斯,《社会学的想象力》,陈强、张永强译,北京：三联书店,2001,第109页。
③ Gouldner, A., The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology, New York:Basic Book Inc,1970.
④ 塞德曼,《有争议的知识：后现代时代的社会理论》,刘北成等译,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2002。
⑤ Burawoy M.,2004 Presidential Address:For Public Sociology, American Sociological Review,2005, vol.70: 4-28.
⑤ 柯林斯、马科夫斯基,《发现社会之旅：西方社会学思想述评》,李霞译,北京：中华书局,2006。
① 塞德曼,《有争议的知识：后现代时代的社会理论》,刘北成等译,北京：中国人民大学出版社,第230页,2002。
② 见刘少杰,《后现代西方社会学理论》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2002：谢立中,《走向多元话语分析：后现代思潮的社会学意涵》,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2009；谢立中,《后社会学：探索与反思》,《社会学研究》2012年1期。
① 吴小英,《女性主义知识社会学素描》,《社会理论》,2006年第2辑,第2-29页；Smith, Dorothy E., The Conceptual Practices of Power:a Feminist Sociology of Knowledge., Boston:Northeastern University Press, 1990.
[1]Abercrombie, Nicholas, Class, Structure, and Knowledge:Problems in the Sociology of Knowledge [M], Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1980.
[2]Ash, E., Expertise:Practical Knowledge and the Early Modern State.[M], Chicago:University of Chicago Press,2010.
[3]Bailey, Leon, Critical Theory and the Sociology of Knowledge:a Comparative Study in the Theory of Ideology. [M], New York:P. Lang,1994.
[4]Barber, Michael D., Social Typifications and the Elusive Other:the Place of Sociology of Knowledge in Alfred Schutz's Phenomenology.,[M], London:Associated University Presses,1988.
[5]Batty, D., Knowledge and its Organization.[M], Maryland:University of Maryland Press, 1976.
[6]Baum, Gregory, Truth Beyond Relativism:Karl Mannheim's Sociology of Knowledge. [M], Milwaukee:Marquette University Press,1977.
[7]Berger P.& Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality:A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge.[M], New York:Penguin Books,1966.
[8]Bloor, D., Knowledge and Social Imagery.[M], Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1991.
[9]Blumer, H., Symbolic Interactionism:Perspective and Method.[M], New Jersey:Prentice-Hall, 1969.
[10]Brandwein, P, A judicial abandonment of blacks? Rethinking the "State Action" Cases of the Waite Court.[J], Law & Society Review,2007, vol.35(2):229-242.
[11]Burawoy M.,2004 Presidential Address:For Public Sociology.[J], American Sociological Review,2005, vol.70:4-28.
[12]Child, A., The Problem of Imputation in the Sociology of Knowledge.[J], Ethics,1941a, vol. 51(2):200-219.
[13]Child, A., The Theoretical Possibilities of the Sociology of Knowledge. [J], Ethics,1941b, vol. 51(4):392-418.
[14]Child, A., The Existential Determination of Thought. [J], Ethics,1942, vol.52(2):153-185.
[15]Child, A., The Problem of Truth in the Sociology of Knowledge. [J], Ethics,1947, vol.58(1): 18-34.
[16]Chubin, D., The Conceptualization of Scientific Specialties.[J], The Sociological Quarterly, 1976, vol.17(4):448-476.
[17]Cole, J.& Harriet Zuckerman, The Emergence of a Scientific Specialty:The Self-Exemplifying Case of the Sociology of Science. [M]. In Lewis Coser (ed.), The Idea of Social Structure, pp.139-74., New York:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,1975.
[18]Collins, H., The TEA Set:Tacit Knowledge and Scientific Networks.[J], Science Studies, 1974, vol.4(2):165-185.
[19]Collins, R., Four Sociological Traditions. [M], New York:Oxford University Press,1994.
[20]Comte, A., The Positive Philosophy.[M], London:George Bell & Sons,1896.
[21]Cordoba, JR.; Farquharson, F, Enquiring into Skills Development with SSM:A South African Experience.[J], Systems Research and Behavioral Science,2008, vol.22(2):120-131.
[22]Coser, L., Sociology of Knowledge., in Sill, D., eds., International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. [M], The Macmillan Co & The Free Press, NY,1968, vol.7, pp.428-434.
[23]Craig, E., Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy.[M], London & New York:Routledge, 1998.
[24]Curtis, James E; John W Petras, The Sociology of Knowledge, a Reader.[M], New York, Praeger,1970.
[25]Dahlke, H.& Becker, Contemporary Social Theory.[M], New York, London: Appleton-Century,1940.
[26]Dalgish, G.M., Webster's Dictionary of American English.[M], New York:Random House Inc,1997.
[27]DeGre, G, The Sociology of Knowledge and the Problem of Truth. [J], Journal of the History of Ideas,1941, vol.2(1):110-115.
[28]Delanty, G., Challenging Knowledge:the University in the Knowledge Society.[M], Buckingham & Philadelphia:Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press,2001.
[29]Dong, D; Chang, TK; Chen, D, Reporting AIDS and the Invisible Victims in China:Official Knowledge as News in the People's Daily,1986-2002.[J], Journal of Health Communication, 2008, vol.25(1):81-97.
[30]Edge, David & Michael J. Mulkay, Astronomy Transformed:the Emergence of Radio Astronomy in Britain. [M], New York:John Wiley & Sons,1976.
[31]Elias, Norbert, Sociology of Knowledge:New Perspectives. [M], Oxford:Clarendon,1971.
[32]Frisby, David, The Alienated Mind:the Sociology of Knowledge in Germany 1918-33. [M], London:Heinemann Educational Books,1983.
[33]Fuller, S., Social Epistemology.[M], Bloomington and Indianapolis:Indiana University Press, 1988.
[34]Fuller S., Philosophy, Rhetoric, and the End of Knowledge:the Coming of Science and Technology Studies.[M], Madison, Wisc.:University of Wisconsin Press,1993
[35]Garfinkel, H., Studies in Ethnomethodology.[M],N. J.:Prentice-Hall,1967.
[36]Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H. et al, The New Production of Knowledge:the Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. [M], London:Sage,1994.
[37]Giddens, A., Positivism and Sociology..[M], London:Hutchinson,1974.
[38]Glennon, Lynda M., A Sociology of Knowledge Analysis of the Women's Liberation Movement.[M], New Brunswick, N. J.,1974.
[39]Glennon, Lynda M., Women and Dualism:a Sociology of Knowledge Analysis.[M], New York:Longman,1979.
[40]Goff, Tom W., Marx and Mead:Contributions to a Sociology of Knowledge. [M], London; Boston:Routledge & Kegan Paul,1980.
[41]Gouldner, A., The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology..[M], New York:Basic Book Inc, 1970.
[42]Hagstrom, W., Factors Related to the Use of Different Modes of Publishing Research in Four Scientific Fields.[M], pp.85-124 in Carnot E. Nelson and D. K. Pollock(eds.), Communication Among Scientists and Engineers. Lexington, Mass:Lexington Books,1970.
[43]Hansen, RE, Program Equity Issues in Schooling:the Testimony of Technology Teachers.[J], International Journal of Technology And Design Education,2008, Jan.2th,144-156.
[44]Hekman, Susan J., Hermeneutics and the Sociology of Knowledge..[M], Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press,1986.
[45]Karacsony, A, Soul-life-knowledge:The young Mannheim's way to sociology. [J], Studies In East European Thought,2008,18(4):724-741.
[46]Kerlin, Michael J., Crossing Berger's Fiery Brook:Religious Truth and Sociology of Knowledge.[M], Washington, D.C.:Thomist Press.,1976.
[47]Kerr, D., Barriers to Integrity:Modern Modes of Knowledge Utilization.[M], Epping: Bowker,1984.
[48]Knorr-Cetina, Karin, Scientific Communities or transepistemic arenas of research? [J], Social Studies of Science,1982, vol.12:101-130.
[49]Lankford, J., Amateurs and Astrophysics:A Neglected Aspect in the Development of A Scientific Specialty. [J], Social Studies of Science,1981, vol.11:275-303.
[50]Law, John, Power, Action, and Belief:a New Sociology of Knowledge?[M], London; Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul,1986.
[51]Leet, M., Aftereffects of Knowledge in Modernity:Politics, Aesthetics, and Individuality.[M], Albany:State University of New York Press,2004.
[52]Lynd, R., Knowledge for what? The Place of Social Science in American Culture.[M], New York:Grove Press Inc,1939.
[53]Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and utopia:an introduction to the sociology of knowledge.[M], London, K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & co., ltd.; New York, Harcourt, Brace and company,1936.
[54]Maquet, J., The Sociology of Knowledge, its Structure and Its Relation to the Philosophy of Knowledge; a Critical Analysis of the Systems of Karl Mannheim and Pitirim A. Sorokin.[M], Boston, Beacon Press,1951.
[55]McCarthy, E., Knowledge as Culture:the New Sociology of Knowledge.[M], London and New York:Routledge,1996.
[56]McKinney, J., The Contribution of George H. Mead to the Sociology of Knowledge.[J], Social Forces,1955, vol.34(2),144-9.
[57]Mead, G, Mind, Self and Society.[M], Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1934.
[58]Meja, Volker; Nico Stehr, The Sociology of Knowledge..[M], Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, M.A, USA:Edward Elgar Pub,1999.
[59]Merton, R., The Sociology of Knowledge. [M], Isis,1937, Vol.27(3):493-503.
[60]Merton, R., On Theoretical Sociology:Five Essays, Old and New.,[M], New York:Free Press, 1967.
[61]Mills, Methodological Consequences of the Sociology of Knowledge. [J], American Jorunal of Sociology,1940, vol.46(3):316-330.
[62]Mullins, N., The Development of a Scientific Specialty:the Phage Group and the Origins of Molecular Biology.[J], Minerva,1972, vol.10:52-82.
[63]Mullins, N., Theories and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology. [M], New York:Harper & Row Publishers,1973.
[64]Neisser, H., On the Sociology of Knowledge. [M], New York, J.H. Heineman,1965.
[65]Nowotny, H., Peter Scott & Michael Gibbons, Rethinking Science:Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. [M], Cambridge:Polity Press,2001.
[66]Remmling, G., Road to Suspicion; a Study of Modern Mentality and the Sociology of Knowledge. [M], New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts,1967.
[67]Remmling, G., Towards the Sociology of Knowledge:Origin and Development of a Sociological Thought Style. [M], London:Routledge and Kegan Paul,1973.
[68]Remmling, G., The Sociology of Karl Mannheim:with a Bibliographical Guide to the Sociology of Knowledge, Ideological Analysis, and Social Planning. [M], London:Routledge & K. Paul,1975.
[69]Rempel, Francis Warren, The Role of Value in Karl Mannheim's Sociology ofKnowledge.[M], The Hague, Mouton,1965.
[70]Ribeiro, R, The Language Barrier as an Aid to Communication. [J], Social Studies of Science, 33:21-41,2007.
[71]Rosser, Sue Vilhauer, Women, Science, and Society:The Crucial Union.[M], New York: Teachers College Press,2000.
[72]Sallaz, J.J.; Zavisca, J., Bourdieu in American Sociology,1980-2004. [J], Annual Review of Sociology,2007,46(2):305-354.
[73]Schwartz, Barry, Vertical Classification:a Study in Structuralism and the Sociology of Knowledge.[M], Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1981.
[74]Shanks, M, Symmetrical Archaeology. [J], World Archaeology,2007,41(2):343-386.
[75]Shrum, W., Scientific Specialties and Technical Systems.[J], Social Studies of Science,1984, vol.14:63-90.
[76]Simonds, A. P., Karl Mannheim's sociology of knowledge.[M], Oxford:Clarendon Press, 1978.
[77]Small, H., A Co-Citation Model of a Scientific Specialty:A Longitudinal Study of Collagen Research. [J], Social Studies of Science,1977, Vol.7(2):139-166.
[78]Small, H.& Henry Griffith, The Structure of Scientific Literatures I:Identifying and Graphing Specialties.[J], Science Studies,1974, Vol.4(1):17-40.
[79]Smith, Dorothy E., The Conceptual Practices of Power:a Feminist Sociology of Knowledge. [M], Boston:Northeastern University Press,1990.
[80]Sorokin, p., Social and Cultural Dynamics(Vol Ⅰ).[M], New York:American Book Company, 1937.
[81]Sorokin, P., The Crisis of Our Age. [M], Oxford:One World Press,1992.
[82]Speier, H., Book Review:Ideology and Utopia. [J], American Journal of Sociology,1937, Vol.43(1):155-166.
[83]Stark, W., The Sociology of Knowledge, An Essay in Aid of a Deeper Understanding of the History of Ideas. [M], Glencoe,Ill., The Free Press,1958.
[84]Stehr, N., Knowledge Society. [M], London:Sage,1994.
[85]Tanesini, Alessandra, An Introduction to Feminist Epistemologies:A Philosophical Introduction.[M], Oxford:Blackwell Publishers,1998.
[86]Turner, S., Social Constructivism and Social Theory.[J], Sociological Theory,1991, vol.9: 22-33.
[87]Wallerstein, I., et al., The Structures of knowledge, or, How many ways may we know? [M], New York:State University of New York at Binghamton,1996.
[88]Whitley, R., Communication Nets in Science:Status and Citation Patterns in Animal Physiology.[J], Sociological Review,1969, vol.17:219-233.
[89]Whitley, R., Black Boxism and the Sociology of Science:a Discussion of the Major Developments in the Field. [M], pp.61-92 in Paul Halmos(ed.), The Sociology of Science:The Sociological Review Monograph 18,1972.
[90]Wolff, Kurt H., The Sociology of Knowledge in the United States of America:a Trend Report and Bibliography.[M], The Hague:Mouton,1967.
[91]Woolgar, Steve, Knowledge and Reflexivity:New Frontiers in the Sociology of Knowledge.[M], London:Sage,1988.
[92]Yeh, N.C., A Framework for Understanding Culture and its Relationship to Information Behaviour:Taiwanese Aborigines' Information Behaviour. [J], Information Research-An International Electronic Journal,2006, vol.29(4):413-441.
[1]鲍曼,立法者与阐释者：论现代性、后现代性与知识分子[M],洪涛泽,上海：上海人民出版社,2000.
[2]贝尔纳,科学的社会功能[M],陈体芳译,北京：商务印书馆,1982.
[3]贝克,风险社会[M],何博闻泽,南京：译林出版社,2004.
[4]比彻、特罗勒尔,学术部落及其领地：知识探索与学科文化[M],唐跃勤、蒲茂华、陈洪捷译,北京：北京大学出版社,2008.
[5]伯格、卢克曼,现实的社会构建[M],汪涌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009.
[6]波丢,人：学术者[M],王作虹译,贵阳：贵州人民出版社,2006.
[7]布鲁尔,知识和社会意象[M],艾彦译,北京：东方出版社,2001.
[8]布迪厄、华康德,实践与反思：反思社会学导引[M],李猛、李康译,北京：中央编译出版社,2004.
[9]布尔迪厄,科学的社会用途：写给科学场的临床社会学[M],刘成富、张艳译,南京大学出版社,2005.
[10]布尔迪厄,科学之科学与反观性[M],陈圣生等译,南宁：广西师范大学出版社,2006.
[11]陈玉林,技术史研究的文化转向[M],沈阳：东北大学出版社,2010.
[12]丹皮尔,科学史：及其与哲学和宗教的关系[M],李珩译,北京：商务印书馆,1997.
[13]德兰迪,知识社会中的大学[M],黄建如译,北京：北京大学出版社,2010.
[14]德兰逖,社会科学：超越建构论和实在论[M],张茂元译,长春：吉林人民出版社,2005.
[15]迪尔凯姆,社会学方法的准则[M],狄玉明译,北京：商务印书馆,1995.
[16]迪尔凯姆,自杀论[M],冯韵文译,北京：商务印书馆,2001.
[17]富勒,科学的统治：开放社会的意识形态与未来[M],刘钝译,上海：上海科技教育出版社,2004.
[18]黄瑞祺,社会理论与社会世界[M],北京：北京大学出版社,2005.
[19]惠特利,科学的智力组织和社会组织[M],赵万里、陈玉林、薛晓斌译,北京：北京大学出版社,2011,
[20]胡辉华,论知识社会学的困境[J],哲学研究,2005,4：92-98.
[21]胡军,知识论[M],北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[22]吉尔兹,地方性知识：阐释人类学论文集[M],王海龙、张家瑄译,北京：中央编译出版社,2000.
[23]金岳霖,知识论[M],北京：商务印书馆,1983.
[24]卡则纳弗,社会学十大概念[M],杨捷译,上海：上海人民出版社,2011.
[25]克兰,无形学院：知识在科学共同体的扩散[M],刘珺珺、顾昕、王德禄译,北京：华夏出版社,1988.
[26]柯林斯,哲学的社会学：一种全球的学术变迁理论(上、下卷)[M],吴琼、齐鹏、李志红译,北京：新华出版社,2004.
[27]柯林斯,互动仪式链[M],林聚任、王鹏、宋丽君译,北京：商务印书馆,2009.
[28]柯林斯、马科夫斯基,发现社会之旅：西方社会学思想述评[M],李霞译,北京：中华书局,2006.
[29]科塞,理念人：一项社会学的考察[M],郭方等译,北京：中央编译出版社,2004.
[30]科塞,社会思想名家[M],石人译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007.
[31]库恩,科学革命的结构[M],金吾伦、胡新和译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003.
[32]库恩,哥白尼革命：西方思想发展中的行星天文学[M],吴国盛等译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003.
[33]库恩,必要的张力[M],范岱年、纪树立译,北京：北京大学出版社,2004.
[34]库恩,结构之后的路[M],邱慧译,北京：北京大学出版社,2012.
[35]利奥塔尔,后现代状态：关于知识的报告[M],车槿山译,北京：三联书店,1997.
[36]列维-斯特劳斯,结构人类学[M],张祖建译,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2006.
[37]林奇,科学实践与日常活动：常人方法论对科学的社会研究[M],邢冬梅译,苏州：苏州大学出版社,2010.
[38]刘小枫,现代性社会理论绪论：现代性与现代中国[M],上海：上海三联书店,1998.
[39]刘少杰,后现代西方社会学理论[M],北京：社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[40]刘文旋,知识的社会性：知识社会学概要[J],哲学动态,2002,1：42-45.
[41]马尔凯,科学与知识社会学[M],林聚任等译,北京：东方出版社,2001.
[42]曼海姆,意识形态与乌托邦[M],黎鸣译,北京：商务印书馆,2005.
[43]米尔斯,社会学的想象力[M],陈强、张永强译,北京：三联书店,2001.
[44]默顿,论理论社会学[M],何凡兴、李卫红、王丽娟译,北京：华夏出版社,1990.
[45]默顿,十七世纪英格兰的科学、技术与社会[M],范岱年等译,北京：商务印书馆,2000.
[46]默顿,科学社会学散忆[M],鲁旭东译,北京：商务印书馆,2004.
[47]默顿,社会理论和社会结构[M],唐少杰、齐心等译,南京：译林出版社,2008.
[48]默顿,科学社会学[M],鲁旭东、林聚任译,北京：商务印书馆,2010.
[49]普赖斯,小科学、大科学[M],宋剑耕、戴振飞译,北京：世界科学出版社,1982.
[50]萨顿,科学史和新人文主义[M],陈恒六、刘兵、朱维光译,北京：华夏出版社,1989.
[51]塞德曼,有争议的知识：后现代时代的社会理论[M],刘北成等译,北京：中国人民大学出版社,2002.
[52]舍勒,知识社会学问题[M],艾彦译,南京：译林出版社,2012.
[53]舒斯特曼、李军学,实用主义对我来说意味着什么：十条原则[J],世界哲学,2011,6：39-44.
[54]舒炜光、邱仁宗,当代西方科学哲学书评(2版)[M],北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007.
[55]舒兹,社会世界的现象学[M],卢岚兰译,台北：桂冠图书公司,1990.
[56]斯宾格勒,西方的没落[M],齐世荣、田农、林传鼎等译,北京：商务印书馆,1991.
[57]苏国勋,社会学与社会建构论[J],国外社会科学,2002,1：4-13.
[58]苏国勋、刘小枫,社会理论的知识学建构[M],上海：上海三联书店；华东师范大学出版社,2005.
[59]涂尔干,宗教生活的基本形式[M],渠东译,上海：上海人民出版社,2006.
[60]涂尔干、莫斯,原始分类[M],汲喆译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005.
[61]韦伯,社会学的基本概念[M],顾忠华译,桂林,广西师范大学出版社,2005.
[62]吴小英,女性主义知识社会学素描[J],社会理论,2006,2：2-29.
[63]谢立中,走向多元话语分析：后现代思潮的社会学意涵[M],北京：中国人民大学出版社,2009.
[64]谢立中,后社会学：探索与反思[J],社会学研究,2012,1：1-26.
[65]亚历山大,社会生活的意义：一种文化社会学的视角[M],周怡等译,北京：北京人学出版社,2011.
[66]赵万里,科学的社会建构：科学知识社会学的理论与实践[M],天津,天津人民出版社,2001.
[67]赵万里、徐敬怡,符号互动论视野下的科学社会研究[J],自然辩证法通讯,2007,6：47-53.
[68]赵万里、赵超,生成图式与反思理性：解析布迪厄的知识社会学理论[J],社会,2012,2：33-50.
[69]郑丹,默顿一般社会学理论与其科学社会学理论的关系[J],科学文化评论,2007,1：53-73.
[70]周晓虹,西方社会学历史与体系·第一卷：经典贡献[M],上海：上海人民出版社,2002.
[71]兹纳涅茨基,知识人的社会角色[M],郏斌祥译,南京：译林出版社,2000.