科学知识地理学的要点解析——以《科学知识的地理》为中心的考察

以《科学知识的地理》为中心,基于学术史、当前学界对该书的述评及相关研究的梳理,文章对科学知识地理学的学术脉络及创见进行了较详的考察。传统科学知识地理性的解释路径,存在无地方性与地方性二元论问题,且“地理”被视为科学的外因。基于科学知识生产“场所”地方性意义的揭示,科学与区域关系的建构,以及科学“流通”与科学全球化的阐释,科学知识地理学建构了“地点-区域-全球”多尺度视野下的科学知识生产、流通、消费解释路径,在揭示辩证性的科学知识地理性的同时,以新的模式解释了科学知识的地方性与全球性关系。当前研究对当代科学知识地理性的强调,以及后殖民思潮的介入,将科学知识地理学带入到了更为广阔的学术视野中。结论建议中国的科学知识地理学研究应注意审视当前科学知识地理学理论的预设,注意挖掘中国科学知识地理性方面的特殊议题,从多个层面结合中国实际讨论科学知识地理性问题,并及时、批判性地吸收和应用相关新思潮、新理论。

A critical review of points of geography of scientific knowledge:Focusing on“Putting science in its place: Geographies of scientific knowledge”

"Putting Science in Its Place: Geographies of Scientific Knowledge"by David N.Livingstone is a striking, fascinating, and unusual book that suggests that geography does not play a prominent part in the critical exploration of science. This book advocates a broader context in which the geography of scientific knowledge(GSK) should be dealt with as another field of science studies, like the history of science, the sociology of science, and the sociology of scientific knowledge, and that"geography"in science studies should be examined from multifarious contexts. Currently, GSK has indeed been recognized as an important academic field, especially in science studies. Focusing on"Putting Science in Its Place"and considering the reviews on this masterwork, and relevant research, this paper provides a critical review on why GSK is relevant now, how it offers critical responses beyond the current academic trends,and whether it is capable of investigating the geographical features of contemporary scientific knowledge(and broadly, of knowledge beyond science, such as indigenous knowledge). It discusses that, although"space"and"geography"were inescapable perspectives on explaining the globality of science in traditional science studies, they were understood as either logically metaphysical or logically metaphysical concepts. As a result, space and geography were not intrinsic variables for the globality of science. The success of GSK in highlighting"thinking geographically"resides within its ability to transcend the spatial problem of science, especially the dualism of"placelessness"and"placeness, "which is contrasted with the tendency to regard space as the external condition of science in traditional geographical research on science. Based on a critical investigation produced by scientific knowledge, which circulated in various locales and claimed that scientific knowledge could be global through various geographical agents, GSK affirmed the consciousness that science is essentially a geographical enterprise. Beyond that, an emphasis on the spatial sensitivity of the production and circulation of contemporary scientific knowledge and the involvement of post-colonial research has brought GSK into a broader perspective. Thus, GSK must create a separate framework in response to what it ignores. The conclusion suggests that Chinese scholars can make a more critical contribution to GSK if the current theoretical presuppositions-which mainly focus on the West-are reexamined, if special geographical questions on Chinese scientific knowledge are explored, and if new insights are imported promptly and critically.