"Of course the practice of science is a social activity, but collective humanity confronts nature, which is outside of man, as a singular subject. To be bewitched by the interactions between men in their deliberations is to miss out the big picture, man-as-such has a relationship to nature, which is mediated through social relations. Intriguingly the social constructionist view is the solipsistic one, that cannot see past the jealous competition of individuals, while the empiricist-inductive one (against the usual characterisation) takes the collective social subject, mankind, for granted.
The relationship *between* man and nature is modern industry. Within that relationship, there is social conflict, which of course gives rise to ideological characterisations of natural laws. But when we use the word ideological, we plainly appeal to an objective truth beyond ideology, or the definition has no meaning."
Sorry James, but nearly every statement you make raises serious issues for me.
Nature is outside of man?
The jealous competition of individuals?
Modern industry is the relationships between man and nature?
(Perhaps one many of the possible relationships between man and nature, but THE relationship???)
Joanna