Scrape wikipedia-science: 1418 new, 1002 updated, 2479 total (kb-cron)

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemic_cultures-0.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1
 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemic_cultures"
 category: "reference"
 tags: "science, encyclopedia"
-date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:39:09.440404+00:00"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:29.445182+00:00"
 instance: "kb-cron"
 ---
 

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphism_thesis-0.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1
 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphism_thesis"
 category: "reference"
 tags: "science, encyclopedia"
-date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:43:50.464721+00:00"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:30.697342+00:00"
 instance: "kb-cron"
 ---
 

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harem_effect_(science)-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+---
+title: "Harem effect (science)"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harem_effect_(science)"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:31.980840+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+In the sociology and history of science, the harem effect refers to a phenomenon whereby a male scientist, in a position of power, predominantly hires female subordinates for his research team.  
+Positively, the "Harem Effect" provided female scientists with exceptional possibilities to pursue careers in their preferred professions. Additionally, it made a lot of scientific endeavours attainable from an economic standpoint. These ladies were the human computers of a period before computers.  
+The downside was that female scientists were frequently refused acknowledgement for their findings and hindered by "busy work," sometimes known as "women's labour." The women at the "harem" received compensation less compared to their male colleagues, yet put in more hours than males despite the fact that this "women's profession" usually required accurate assessments, difficult mathematical calculations, and large amounts of data processing. Most importantly, it is sometimes forgotten that these female scientists' "women's labour" during the Victorian era led to remarkable advancements in a variety of subjects.  
+
+
+== History ==
+While there are numerous historical examples of this phenomenon and the practice may continue today, two examples stand out in the literature. Erwin Frink Smith, a USDA plant pathologist in the Bureau of Plant Industry, hired more than twenty female assistants at the agency to study various agricultural problems in the late 19th and early 20th century. Edward Charles Pickering, astrophysicist and director of the Harvard College Observatory, assembled what became known as “Pickering's Harem”—an all-female staff of a dozen or more to assist in his research program to gather and analyze stellar spectra.
+Possible reasons suggested for this effect include the significantly lower pay required (allowing many more assistants to be hired) and reduced competition from a "bevy of female subordinates, competent but less threatening than an equal number of bright young men." In Smith's case, a further factor may have been USDA's structural exclusion of women from taking the examinations that would have allowed them to enter the higher-ranking jobs for which they were qualified.
+
+
+== References ==
+
+
+== External links ==
+Photograph of Pickering's Harem (1912)

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjective_verifiability-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
+---
+title: "Intersubjective verifiability"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjective_verifiability"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:34.524429+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+Intersubjective verifiability is the capacity of a concept to be readily and accurately communicated between individuals ("intersubjectively"), and to be reproduced under varying circumstances for the purposes of verification. It is a core principle of empirical, scientific investigation.
+Although there are areas of belief that do not consistently employ intersubjective verifiability (e.g., many religious claims), intersubjective verifiability is a near-universal way of arbitrating truth claims used by people everywhere. In its basic form, it can be found in colloquial expressions, e.g., "I'm from Missouri. Show me!" or "Seeing is believing". The scientific principle of replication of findings by investigators other than those that first reported the phenomenon is simply a more highly structured form of the universal principle of intersubjective verifiability.
+
+
+== Subjective experience ==
+Each individual is a subject, and must subjectively experience the physical world. Each subject has a different perspective and point of view on various aspects of the world. However, by sharing their comparable experiences intersubjectively, individuals may gain an increasingly similar understanding of the world. In this way, many different subjective experiences can come together to form intersubjective ones that are less likely to be prone to individual bias or gaps in knowledge.
+While specific internal experiences are not intersubjectively verifiable, the existence of thematic patterns of internal experience can be intersubjectively verified.  For example, whether or not people are telling what they believe to be the truth when they make claims can only be known by the claimants.  However, we can intersubjectively verify that people almost universally experience discomfort (hunger) when they haven't had enough to eat.  We generally have only a crude ability to compare (measure) internal experiences.
+
+
+== Congruence and incongruence ==
+When an external, public phenomenon is experienced and carefully described (in words or measurements) by one individual, other individuals can see if their experiences of the phenomenon "fit" the description. If they do, a sense of congruence between one subject and another occurs. This is the basis for a definition of what is true that is agreed upon by the involved parties. If the description does not fit the experience of one or more of the parties involved, incongruence occurs instead.
+Incongruent contradictions between the experience and descriptions of different individuals can be caused by a number of factors. One common source of incongruence is the inconsistent use of language in the descriptions people use, such as the same words being used differently. Such semantic problems require more careful development and use of language.
+Incongruence also arises from a failure to describe the phenomenon well. In these cases, further development of the description, model, or theory used to refer to the phenomenona is required.
+A third form of incongruence arises when the descriptions do not conform to consensual (i.e., intersubjectively verifiable) experience, such as when the descriptions are faulty, incorrect, wrong, or inaccurate, and need to be replaced by more accurate descriptions, models, or theories.
+
+
+== Versus belief based on faith ==
+
+The contradiction between the truths derived from intersubjective verification and beliefs based on faith or on appeal to authority (e.g., many religious beliefs) forms the basis for the conflict between religion and science.  There have been attempts to bring the two into congruence, and the modern, cutting edge of science, especially in physics, seems to many observers to lend itself to a melding of religious experience and intersubjective verification of beliefs.  Some scientists have described religious worldviews—generally of a mystical nature—consistent with their understanding of science:
+
+There are two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle ...
+Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind ...
+The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. The religion which is based on experience, which refuses dogmatism ...
+
+There remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion. (Albert Einstein)
+Other scientists, who are committed to basing belief on intersubjective verification, have called for or predicted the development of a religion consistent with science.
+
+A religion old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the universe as revealed by modern science, might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths. Sooner or later, such a religion will emerge. (Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot)
+The evolutionary epic is probably the best myth we will ever have ...
+The true evolutionary epic, retold as poetry, is as intrinsically ennobling as any religious epic. (Edward O. Wilson)
+Responding to this apparent overlap between cutting edge science and mystical experience, in recent years, there have been overt efforts to formulate religious belief systems that are built on truth claims based upon intersubjective verifiability, e.g. Anthroposophy, Yoism.
+
+
+== See also ==
+
+Ineffability
+Objectivity (science)
+Phenomenology
+Replication crisis
+Scientific method
+
+
+== Notes and references ==
+
+The Marriage of Sense and Soul: Integrating Science and Religion. Ken Wilber. 1998. Random House (ISBN 0375500545)

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Desmond_Bernal_Prize-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+---
+title: "John Desmond Bernal Prize"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Desmond_Bernal_Prize"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:35.744080+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+The John Desmond Bernal Prize is an award given annually by the Society for Social Studies of Science (4S) to scholars judged to have made a distinguished contribution to the interdisciplinary field of Science and Technology Studies (STS). The award was launched in 1981, with the support of Eugene Garfield.
+The award is named after the scientist John Desmond Bernal.
+
+
+== Award recipients ==
+Source: Society for Social Studies of Science Archived 2017-08-06 at the Wayback Machine
+
+
+== See also ==
+List of social sciences awards
+
+
+== References ==
+
+
+== External links ==
+Society for Social Studies of Science

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+---
+title: "Mathematical sociology"
+chunk: 1/5
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:37.275238+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+Mathematical sociology is an interdisciplinary field of research concerned with the use of mathematics within sociological research. 
+
+== History ==
+Starting in the early 1940s, Nicolas Rashevsky, and subsequently in the late 1940s, Anatol Rapoport and others, developed a relational and probabilistic approach to the characterization of large social networks in which the nodes are persons and the links are acquaintanceship. During the late 1940s, formulas were derived that connected local parameters such as closure of contacts – if A is linked to both B and C, then there is a greater than chance probability that B and C are linked to each other – to the global network property of connectivity.
+Moreover, acquaintanceship is a positive tie, but what about negative ties such as animosity among persons?  To tackle this problem, graph theory, which is the mathematical study of abstract representations of networks of points and lines, can be extended to include these two types of links and thereby to create models that represent both positive and negative sentiment relations, which are represented as signed graphs.  A signed graph is called balanced if the product of the signs of all relations in every cycle (links in every graph cycle) is positive.  Through formalization by mathematician Frank Harary, this work produced the fundamental theorem of this theory.  It says that if a network of interrelated positive and negative ties is balanced, e.g. as illustrated by the psychological principle that "my friend's enemy is my enemy", then it consists of two sub-networks such that each has positive ties among its nodes and there are only negative ties between nodes in distinct sub-networks.  The imagery here is of a social system that splits into two cliques. There is, however, a special case where one of the two sub-networks is empty, which might occur in very small networks.
+In another model, ties have relative strengths. 'Acquaintanceship' can be viewed as a 'weak' tie and 'friendship' is represented as a strong tie.  Like its uniform cousin discussed above, there is a concept of closure, called strong triadic closure.  A graph satisfies strong triadic closure If A is strongly connected to B, and B is strongly connected to C, then A and C must have a tie (either weak or strong).
+In these two developments we have mathematical models bearing upon the analysis of structure.  Other early influential developments in mathematical sociology pertained to process.  For instance, in 1952 Herbert A. Simon produced a mathematical formalization of a published theory of social groups by constructing a model consisting of a deterministic system of differential equations.  A formal study of the system led to theorems about the dynamics and the implied equilibrium states of any group.
+The emergence of mathematical models in the social sciences was part of the zeitgeist in the 1940s and 1950s in which a variety of new interdisciplinary scientific innovations occurred, such as information theory, game theory, cybernetics and mathematical model building in the social and behavioral sciences.
+
+== Approaches ==
+
+=== Mathematics in sociology ===
+Focusing on mathematics within sociological research, mathematical sociology uses mathematics to construct social theories.  Mathematical sociology aims to take sociological theory and to express it in mathematical terms.  The benefits of this approach include increased clarity and the ability to use mathematics to derive implications of a theory that cannot be arrived at intuitively.  In mathematical sociology, the preferred style is encapsulated in the phrase "constructing a mathematical model."   This means making specified assumptions about some social phenomenon, expressing them in formal mathematics, and providing an empirical interpretation for the ideas.  It also means deducing properties of the model and comparing these with relevant empirical data.  Social network analysis is the best-known contribution of this subfield to sociology as a whole and to the scientific community at large. The models typically used in mathematical sociology allow sociologists to understand how predictable local interactions are and they are often able to elicit global patterns of social structure.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology-1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+---
+title: "Mathematical sociology"
+chunk: 2/5
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:37.275238+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+== Further developments ==
+In 1954, a critical expository analysis of Rashevsky's social behavior models was written by sociologist James S. Coleman. Rashevsky's models and as well as the model constructed by Simon raise a question: how can one connect such theoretical models to the data of sociology, which often take the form of surveys in which the results are expressed in the form of proportions of people believing or doing something.  This suggests deriving the equations from assumptions about the chances of an individual changing state in a small interval of time, a procedure well known in the mathematics of stochastic processes.
+Coleman embodied this idea in his 1964 book Introduction to Mathematical Sociology, which showed how stochastic processes in social networks could be analyzed in such a way as to enable testing of the constructed model by comparison with the relevant data. The same idea can and has been applied to processes of change in social relations, an active research theme in the study of social networks, illustrated by an empirical study appearing in the journal Science.
+In other work, Coleman employed mathematical ideas drawn from economics, such as general equilibrium theory, to argue that general social theory should begin with a concept of purposive action and, for analytical reasons, approximate such action by the use of rational choice models (Coleman, 1990).  This argument is similar to viewpoints expressed by other sociologists in their efforts to use rational choice theory in sociological analysis although such efforts have met with substantive and philosophical criticisms.
+Meanwhile, structural analysis of the type indicated earlier received a further extension to social networks based on institutionalized social relations, notably those of kinship.  The linkage of mathematics and sociology here involved abstract algebra, in particular, group theory.  This, in turn, led to a focus on a data-analytical version of homomorphic reduction of a complex social network (which along with many other techniques is presented in Wasserman and Faust 1994).
+In regard to Rapoport's random and biased net theory, his 1961 study of a large sociogram, co-authored with Horvath turned out to become a very influential paper. There was early evidence of this influence. In 1964, Thomas Fararo and a co-author analyzed another large friendship sociogram using a biased net model. Later in the 1960s, Stanley Milgram described the small world problem and undertook a field experiment dealing with it. A highly fertile idea was suggested and applied by Mark Granovetter in which he drew upon Rapoport's 1961 paper to suggest and apply a distinction between weak and strong ties. The key idea was that there was "strength" in weak ties.
+Some programs of research in sociology employ experimental methods to study social interaction processes.  Joseph Berger and his colleagues initiated such a program in which the central idea is the use of the theoretical concept "expectation state" to construct theoretical models to explain interpersonal processes, e.g., those linking external status in society to differential influence in local group decision-making. Much of this theoretical work is linked to mathematical model building, especially after the late 1970s adoption of a graph theoretic representation of social information processing, as Berger (2000) describes in looking back upon the development of his program of research. In 1962 he and his collaborators explained model building by reference to the goal of the model builder, which could be explication of a concept in a theory, representation of a single recurrent social process, or a broad theory based on a theoretical construct, such as, respectively, the concept of balance in psychological and social structures, the process of conformity in an experimental situation, and stimulus sampling theory.
+The generations of mathematical sociologists that followed Rapoport, Simon, Harary, Coleman, White and Berger, including those entering the field in the 1960s such as Thomas Fararo, Philip Bonacich, and Tom Mayer, among others, drew upon their work in a variety of ways.
+
+== Present research ==
+Mathematical sociology remains a small subfield within the discipline, but it has succeeded in spawning a number of other subfields which share its goals of formally modeling social life.  The foremost of these fields is social network analysis, which has become among the fastest growing areas of sociology in the 21st century.  The other major development in the field is the rise of computational sociology, which expands the mathematical toolkit with the use of computer simulations, artificial intelligence and advanced statistical methods.  The latter subfield also makes use of the vast new data sets on social activity generated by social interaction on the internet.
+One important indicator of the significance of mathematical sociology is that the general interest journals in the field, including such central journals as The American Journal of Sociology and The American Sociological Review, have published mathematical models that became influential in the field at large.
+More recent trends in mathematical sociology are evident in contributions to The Journal of Mathematical Sociology (JMS).  Several trends stand out: the further development of formal theories that explain experimental data dealing with small group processes, the continuing interest in structural balance as a major mathematical and theoretical idea, the interpenetration of mathematical models oriented to theory and innovative quantitative techniques relating to methodology, the use of computer simulations to study problems in social complexity, interest in micro–macro linkage and the problem of emergence, and ever-increasing research on networks of social relations.  
+Thus, topics from the earliest days, like balance and network models, continue to be of contemporary interest. The formal techniques employed remain many of the standard and well-known methods of mathematics: differential equations, stochastic processes and game theory. Newer tools like agent-based models used in computer simulation studies are prominently represented. Perennial substantive problems still drive research: social diffusion, social influence, social status origins and consequences, segregation, cooperation, collective action, power, and much more.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology-3.md

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+---
+title: "Mathematical sociology"
+chunk: 4/5
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:37.275238+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+In the simplest models, each person in an interactive pair, is represented in terms of one side of a role relationship in which fundamental sentiments associated with each role guide the process of immediate interaction. A higher level of the control process can be activated in which the definition of the situation is transformed. This research program comprises several of the key chapters in a  2006 volume of contributions to control systems theory (in the sense of Powers 1975 ) in sociology. (8) "Distributive Justice Theory" and Guillermina Jasso: Since 1980, Jasso has treated problems of distributive justice with an original theory that uses mathematical methods. She has elaborated upon and applied this theory to a wide range of social phenomena. Her most general mathematical apparatus – with the theory of distributive justice as a special case—deals with any subjective comparison between some actual state and some reference level for it, e.g., a comparison of an actual reward with an expected reward. In her justice theory, she starts with a very simple premise, the justice evaluation function (the natural logarithm of the ratio of actual to just reward) and then derives numerous empirically testable implications. (9) Collaborative research and John Skvoretz. A major feature of modern science is collaborative research in which the distinctive skills of the participants combine to produce original research. Skvoretz, in addition to this other contributions, has been a frequent collaborator in a variety of theoretical research programs, often using mathematical expertise as well as skills in experimental design, statistical data analysis and simulation methods. Some examples are: (1) Collaborative work on theoretical, statistical and mathematical problems in biased net theory. (2) Collaborative contributions to Expectation States Theory. (3) Collaborative contributions to Elementary Theory. (4) Collaboration with Bruce Mayhew in a structuralist research program. From the early 1970s, Skvoretz has been one of the most prolific of contributors to the advance of mathematical sociology. The above discussion could be expanded to include many other programs and individuals including European sociologists such as Peter Abell and the late Raymond Boudon.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology-4.md

@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+---
+title: "Mathematical sociology"
+chunk: 5/5
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:37.275238+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+== Awards in mathematical sociology ==
+The Mathematical Sociology section of The American Sociological Association in 2002 initiated awards for contributions to the field, including The James S. Coleman Distinguished Career Achievement Award. (Coleman had died in 1995 before the section had been established.)  Given every other year, the awardees include some of those just listed in terms of their career-long research programs:
+
+2022: Guillermina Jasso, New York University
+2020: Noah Friedkin, University of California, Santa Barbara
+2018: Ronald Breiger, University of Arizona
+2017: Lynn Smith-Lovin, Duke University.
+2014: Philip Bonacich, University of California, Los Angeles.
+2012: John Skvoretz, University of South Florida.
+2010: David R. Heise, Indiana University.
+2008: Scott Boorman, Yale University.
+2006: Linton Freeman, University of California, Irvine.
+2004: Thomas Fararo, University of Pittsburgh.
+2002: Harrison White, Columbia University.
+The section's other categories of awards and their recipients are listed at ASA Section on Mathematical Sociology
+
+== Texts and journals ==
+Mathematical sociology textbooks cover a variety of models, usually explaining the required mathematical background before discussing important work in the literature (Fararo 1973, Leik and Meeker 1975, Bonacich and Lu 2012). An earlier text by Otomar Bartos (1967) is still of relevance. Of wider scope and mathematical sophistication is the text by Rapoport (1983).  A very reader-friendly and imaginative introduction to explanatory thinking leading to models is Lave and March (1975, reprinted 1993). The Journal of Mathematical Sociology (started in 1971) has been open to papers covering a broad spectrum of topics employing a variety of types of mathematics, especially through frequent special issues. Other journals in sociology who publish papers with substantial use of mathematics are Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Journal of social structure, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation
+Articles in Social Networks, a journal devoted to social structural analysis, very often employ mathematical models and related structural data analyses.  In addition – importantly indicating the penetration of mathematical model building into sociological research – the major comprehensive journals in sociology, especially The American Journal of Sociology and The American Sociological Review, regularly publish articles featuring mathematical formulations.
+
+== See also ==
+Isaac Asimov's Foundation series, based on a massive expansion of the premise
+Positivism
+Statistics
+Computational sociology
+Game theory
+Thomas Schelling
+Peter Blau
+Harrison White
+Nicolas Rashevsky
+Society for Mathematical Biology
+Interpersonal ties
+James Samuel Coleman
+James D. Montgomery
+Thomas Fararo
+Social network
+
+== References ==
+
+== Further reading ==
+Bartos, Otomar. 1967. "Simple Models of Group Behavior." Columbia University Press.
+Berger, Joseph. 2000. "Theory and Formalization: Some Reflections on Experience." Sociological Theory 18(3):482-489.
+Berger, Joseph, Bernard P. Cohen, J. Laurie Snell, and Morris Zelditch, Jr. 1962. Types of Formalization in Small Group Research. Houghton-Mifflin.
+Berger, Joseph and Morris Zelditch Jr. 2002. New Directions in Contemporary Sociological Theory Rowman and Littlefield.
+Bonacich, Philip and Philip Lu. Introduction to Mathematical Sociology. Princeton University Press.
+Coleman, James S. 1964. An Introduction to Mathematical Sociology. Free Press.
+_____. 1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Harvard University Press.
+Doreian, Patrick, Vladimir Batagelj, and Anuska Ferligoj. 2004. Generalized Blockmodeling. Cambridge University Press.
+Edling, Christofer R. 2002. "Mathematics in Sociology," Annual Review of Sociology.
+Fararo, Thomas J. 1973. Mathematical Sociology. Wiley. Reprinted by Krieger, 1978.
+_____. 1984. Editor. Mathematical Ideas and Sociological Theory. Gordon and Breach.
+_____. 1989. The Meaning of General Theoretical Sociology: Tradition and Formalization. Cambridge University Press.
+Freeman, Linton C. 2004. The Development of Social Network Analysis. Empirical Press.
+Heise, David R. 1979. Understanding Events: Affect and the Construction of Social Action. Cambridge University Press.
+Helbing, Dirk. 1995. Quantitative Sociodynamics. Kluwer Academics.
+Lave, Charles and James March. 1975. An Introduction to Models in the Social Sciences. Harper and Row.
+Leik, Robert K. and Barbara F. Meeker. 1975. Mathematical Sociology. Prentice-Hall.
+Rapoport, Anatol. 1983. Mathematical Models in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Wiley.
+Nicolas Rashevsky.: 1965, The Representation of Organisms in Terms of Predicates, Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics 27: 477-491.
+Nicolas Rashevsky.: 1969, Outline of a Unified Approach to Physics, Biology and Sociology., Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics 31: 159-198.
+Rosen, Robert. 1972. "Tribute to Nicolas Rashevsky 1899-1972." Progress in Theoretical Biology 2.
+Leik, Robert K. and Barbara F. Meeker. 1975. Mathematical Sociology. Prentice-Hall.
+Simon, Herbert A. 1952. "A Formal Theory of Interaction in Social Groups." American Sociological Review 17:202-212.
+Wasserman, Stanley and Katherine Faust. 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press.
+White, Harrison C. 1963. An Anatomy of Kinship. Prentice-Hall.
+_____. 1970. Chains of Opportunity. Harvard University Press.
+_____. 1992. Identity and Control: A Structural Theory of Action. Princeton University Press.
+_____. 2008. Identity and Control: How Social Formations Emerge. 2nd Ed. (Revised) Princeton University Press.
+
+== External links ==
+John Skvoretz; Thomas J Fararo (1952). "Mathematical sociology" (PDF). Sociopedia.isa. 170 (4314): 3. Bibcode:1952Natur.170....3G. doi:10.1038/170003a0. S2CID 4181915.
+Home Page of Mathematical Sociology Section of the American Sociological Association
+The Society for Mathematical Biology
+Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics
+European Society for Mathematical and Theoretical Biology (ESMTB)
+Mathematical Sociology Section Home Page

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merton_thesis-0.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1
 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merton_thesis"
 category: "reference"
 tags: "science, encyclopedia"
-date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:31:54.749002+00:00"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:38.481296+00:00"
 instance: "kb-cron"
 ---
 

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mihi_itch-0.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1
 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mihi_itch"
 category: "reference"
 tags: "science, encyclopedia"
-date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:39:53.507857+00:00"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:39.711234+00:00"
 instance: "kb-cron"
 ---
 

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_innovation_without_representation-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+---
+title: "No innovation without representation"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_innovation_without_representation"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:40.844025+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+No innovation without representation is a democratic ideal of ensuring that everyone involved gets a chance to be represented fairly in technological developments. Political philosopher of technology Langdon Winner states that groups and social interests likely to be affected by a particular kind of technological change ought to be represented at an early stage in defining exactly what that technology will be. It is the idea that relevant parties have a say in technological developments and are not left in the dark. It has been spoken about by political scientist Massimiano Bucchi. This ideal does not require the public to become experts on the topics of science and engineering, it only asks that the opinions and ideas be heard before making drastic decisions, as talked about by Steven L. Goldman.
+
+
+== Arguments for no innovation without representation ==
+Arguments for no innovation without representation stated by Carl Mitcham:
+
+Experts cannot escape public influence. There will always be influence from corporations or outside sources. "Technoscientific decision making is never neutral or objective."
+Public participation will have a more beneficial long-term effect than no participation. "Without public participation nothing will get done"
+Experts promote their own self-interest at the expense of the public. Justification of modern technology is that it is designed to promote human welfare.
+Those that are affected by technological decisions should have a say in what affects them.
+Moral autonomy is necessary. This is when "persons find their moral agency abridged when decisions that affect their lives are made heteronomously by others."
+Public participation will lead to better outcomes. The idea that the majority will make the decision that has the most positive impact on technology or themselves.
+Education through participation is necessary. Individuals will only become more intelligent through participation.
+Currently there is a lack of strong moral consensus. People have different feelings and different opinions and participation of a greater population will have the greatest positive effect on society.
+
+
+== Examples of when innovation without representation was unnecessary ==
+Not all technology needs equal structural influence. Giving weight to the fact that one should not have to defend every decision they make to a large committee or formalized group (“Every time someone is moved to buy a fork or to sell a pencil sharpener"), it would be a distraction from important technological advances, as well as a misuse of resources, to poll everyone involved. Technology that is already developed without controversy is part of our social principle and not something where it is democratically necessary to go about evaluation for use in general life. The primary consideration of democratic innovation is for those instances that affect a large level and hold influences beyond ethnic value.
+"Rule by democratic elites is more democratic than thick democratic participation – in the sense that it is more likely, at least in theory, to protect civil liberties and minority rights."  A great example is that the American Bill of Rights was developed by a group of experts who were looking out for the common goal of the majority population. A participatory democracy involving the consideration and opinions of everyone involved could have taken years to implement.
+
+
+== Examples of when it was implemented ==
+In 1970, Northwest Canada was found to have an abundance of natural gas. Rather than allowing pipelines to be built with no regard to the Indigenous peoples living there, the Canadian Supreme Court justice Thomas Burger, arranged community hearings. These hearings took place to allow both investors of the pipeline as well as the Indigenous people who would be directly affected by its construction to come forward with their concerns and evidence for their reasonings. The judge believed that everyone's point should be respectfully considered, and to further prove this he arranged over 30 meetings in remote settings and provided transportation to those interested in attending. In addition, media radio coverage was provided in French, English, and Native languages, which allowed people to understand multiple sides of concerns and the process that was taking place. Ultimately it was decided to reroute the pipeline to follow existing highways rather than cutting through Native lands.
+
+
+== Future changes ==
+According to Richard Sclove, there are two main reasons for why the democratic system will be most effective when cultural pluralism is seen as an important factor in community success. "First, equal respect for people entails respecting their cultural heritage. To undermine a culture corrodes the social bases of its members’ sense of self and purpose. Second, all people share an interest in living in a society and a world comprised of many cultures."
+
+
+== See also ==
+Amish life in the modern world § Use of modern technology
+Appropriate technology
+
+
+== References ==

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_and_the_history_of_science-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+---
+title: "Sociology and the history of science"
+chunk: 1/3
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_and_the_history_of_science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:33.315055+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+Throughout the 20th and 21st century, sociological inquiry has sought to analyze large-scale socialized patterns and trends in the development of science, as well as ask and answer questions about how science "works" both in a philosophical and practical sense. In particular, sociologists concerned with the history of science ask how societies construct narritives around scienticity, and how methodologies and paradigms throughout scientific history not only change, but change in context to culture, authority, political economy, and more sociologically strident means of analysis.
+
+== Science as a social enterprise ==
+
+In the last few centuries, science as a social enterprise has grown rapidly. The few individuals who could conduct natural research in antiquity were either wealthy individuals themselves, had wealthy sponsors, or had the backing of a religious group. Today, scientific research has tremendous government support and also ongoing support from the private sector.
+Available methods of communication have improved tremendously over time. Instead of waiting months or years for a hand-copied letter to arrive, today scientific communication can be practically instantaneous. Earlier, most natural philosophers worked in relative isolation, due to the difficulty and slowness of communication. Still, there was a considerable amount of cross-fertilization between distant groups and individuals.
+Nowadays, almost all modern scientists participate in a scientific community, hypothetically global in nature (though often based around a relatively few nations and institutions of stature), but also strongly segregated into different fields of study. The scientific community is important because it represents a source of established knowledge which, if used properly, ought to be more reliable than personally acquired knowledge of any given individual. The community also provides a feedback mechanism, often in the form of practices such as peer review and reproducibility. Most items of scientific content (experimental results, theoretical proposals, or literature reviews) are reported in scientific journals and are hypothetically subjected to peer scrutiny, though a number of scholarly critics from both inside and outside the scientific community have, in recent decades, began to question the effect of commercial and government investment in science on the peer review and publishing process, as well as the internal disciplinary limitations to the scientific publication process.
+
+A major development of the Scientific Revolution was the foundation of scientific societies: Academia Secretorum Naturae (Accademia dei Segreti, the Academy of the Mysteries of Nature) can be considered the first scientific community; founded in Naples 1560 by Giambattista della Porta. The academy had an exclusive membership rule: discovery of a new law of nature was a prerequisite for admission. It was soon shut down by Pope Paul V for alleged sorcery.
+The Academia Secretorum Naturae was replaced by the Accademia dei Lincei, which was founded in Rome in 1603. The Lincei included Galileo as a member, but failed upon his condemnation in 1633. The Accademia del Cimento, Florence 1657, lasted 10 years. The Royal Society of London, 1660 to the present day, brought together a diverse collection of scientists to discuss theories, conduct experiments, and review each other's work. The Académie des Sciences was created as an institution of the government of France 1666, meeting in the King's library. The Akademie der Wissenschaften began in Berlin 1700.
+Early scientific societies provided valuable functions, including a community open to and interested in empirical inquiry, and also more familiar with and more educated about the subject. In 1758, with the aid of his pupils, Lagrange established a society, which was subsequently incorporated as the Turin Academy.
+Much of what is considered the modern institution of science was formed during its professionalization in the 19th century. During this time the location of scientific research shifted primarily to universities, though to some extent it also became a standard component of industry as well. In the early years of the 20th century, especially after the role of science in the first World War, governments of major industrial nations began to invest heavily in scientific research. This effort was dwarfed by the funding of scientific research undertaken by all sides in World War II, which produced such "wonder weapons" as radar, rocketry, and the atomic bomb. During the Cold War, a large amount of government resources were poured into science by the United States, USSR, and many European powers. It was during this time that DARPA funded nationwide computer networks including ARPANET the precursor to the Internet. In the post-Cold War era, a decline in government funding from many countries has been met with an increase of industrial and private investment. The funding of science is a major factor in its historical and global development.  So although science is hypothetically international in scope, in a practical sense it has usually centered around wherever it could find the most funding.
+During the Scientific Revolution, early scientists communicated in Latin, which had been the language of academia during the Middle Ages, and which was read and written by scholars from many countries. In the mid-1600s, publications started to appear in local languages. By 1900, German, French and English were dominant. Anti-German sentiment caused by World War I and World War II and boycotts of German scientists resulted in the loss of German as a scientific language. In later decades of the 20th century, the economic dominance and scientific productivity of the United States led to the rise of English, which after the end of the Cold War has become the dominant language of scientific communication.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_and_the_history_of_science-1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+---
+title: "Sociology and the history of science"
+chunk: 2/3
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_and_the_history_of_science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:33.315055+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+== Political support ==
+One of the basic requirements for a scientific community is the existence and approval of a political sponsor; in England, the Royal Society operates under the aegis of the monarchy; in the US, the National Academy of Sciences was founded by Act of the United States Congress; etc. Otherwise, when the basic elements of knowledge were being formulated, the political rulers of the respective communities could choose to arbitrarily either support or disallow the nascent scientific communities. For example, Alhazen had to feign madness to avoid execution. The polymath Shen Kuo lost political support, and could not continue his studies until he came up with discoveries that showed his worth to the political rulers. The admiral Zheng He could not continue his voyages of exploration after the emperors withdrew their support. Another famous example was the suppression of the work of Galileo, by the twentieth century, Galileo would be pardoned.
+
+== Patterns in the history of science ==
+
+One of the major occupations with those interested in the history of science is whether or not it displays certain patterns or trends, usually along the question of change between one or more scientific theories. Generally speaking, there have historically been three major models adopted in various forms within the philosophy of science.
+
+The first major model, implicit in most early histories of science and generally a model put forward by practicing scientists themselves in their textbook literature, is associated with the criticisms of logical positivism by Karl Popper (1902–1994) from the 1930s. Popper's model of science is one in which scientific progress is achieved through a falsification of incorrect theories and the adoption instead of theories which are progressively closer to truth. In this model, scientific progress is a linear accumulation of facts, each one adding to the last. In this model, the physics of Aristotle (384 BC – 322 BC) was simply subsumed by the work of Isaac Newton (1642–1727) (classical mechanics), which itself was eclipsed by the work of Albert Einstein (1879–1955) (Relativity), and later the theory of quantum mechanics (established in 1925), each one more accurate than the last.
+A major challenge to this model came from the work of the historian and philosopher Thomas Kuhn (1922–1996) in his work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions published in 1962. Kuhn, a former physicist, argued against the view that scientific progress was linear, and that modern scientific theories were necessarily just more accurate versions of theories of the past. Rather, Kuhn's version of scientific development consisted of dominant structures of thought and practices, which he called "paradigms", in which research went through phases of "normal" science ("puzzle solving") and "revolutionary" science (testing out new theories based on new assumptions, brought on by uncertainty and crisis in existing theories). In Kuhn's model, different paradigms represented entirely different and incommensurate assumptions about the universe.  The mode was thus uncertain about whether paradigms shifted in a way which necessarily relied upon greater attainment of truth. In Kuhn's view, Aristotle's physics, Newton's classical mechanics, and Einstein's Relativity were entirely different ways to think about the world; each successive paradigm defined what questions could be asked about the world and (perhaps arbitrarily) discarded aspects of the previous paradigm which no longer seemed applicable or important. Kuhn claimed that far from merely building on the previous theory's accomplishments, each new paradigm essentially throws out the old way of looking at the universe, and comes up with its own vocabulary to describe it and its own guidelines for expanding knowledge within the new paradigm.
+Kuhn's model met with much suspicion from scientists, historians, and philosophers. Some scientists felt that Kuhn went too far in divorcing scientific progress from truth; many historians felt that his argument was too codified for something as polyvariant and historically contingent as scientific change; and many philosophers felt that the argument did not go far enough. The furthest extreme of such reasoning was put forth by the philosopher Paul Feyerabend (1924–1994), who argued that there were no consistent methodologies used by all scientists at all times which allowed certain forms of inquiry to be labeled "scientific" in a way which made them different from any other form of inquiry, such as witchcraft. Feyerabend argued harshly against the notion that falsification was ever truly followed in the history of science, and noted that scientists had long undertaken practices to arbitrarily consider theories to be accurate even if they failed many sets of tests. Feyerabend argued that a pluralistic methodology should be undertaken for the investigation of knowledge, and noted that many forms of knowledge which were previously thought to be "non-scientific" were later accepted as a valid part of the scientific canon.
+Many other theories of scientific change have been proposed over the years with various changes of emphasis and implications. In general, though, most float somewhere between these three models for change in scientific theory, the connection between theory and truth, and the nature of scientific progress.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_and_the_history_of_science-2.md

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+---
+title: "Sociology and the history of science"
+chunk: 3/3
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_and_the_history_of_science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:35:33.315055+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+== The nature of scientific discovery ==
+Individual ideas and accomplishments are among the most famous aspects of science, both internally and in larger society.  Breakthrough figures like Sir Isaac Newton or Albert Einstein are often celebrated as geniuses and heroes of science. Popularizers of science, including the news media and scientific biographers, contribute to this phenomenon.  But many scientific historians emphasize the collective aspects of scientific discovery, and de-emphasize the importance of the "Eureka!" moment.
+A detailed look at the history of science often reveals that the minds of great thinkers were primed with the results of previous efforts, and often arrive on the scene to find a crisis of one kind or another. For example, Einstein did not consider the physics of motion and gravitation in isolation.  His major accomplishments solved a problem which had come to a head in the field only in recent years—empirical data showing that the speed of light was inexplicably constant, no matter the apparent speed of the observer. (See Michelson–Morley experiment.) Without this information, it is very unlikely that Einstein would have conceived of anything like relativity.
+The question of who should get credit for any given discovery is often a source of some controversy. There are many priority disputes, in which multiple individuals or teams have competing claims over who discovered something first. Multiple simultaneous discovery is actually a surprisingly common phenomenon, perhaps largely explained by the idea that previous contributions (including the emergence of contradictions between existing theories, or unexpected empirical results) make a certain concept ready for discovery. Simple priority disputes are often a matter of documenting when certain experiments were performed, or when certain ideas were first articulated to colleagues or recorded in a fixed medium.
+Many times the question of exactly which event should qualify as the moment of discovery is difficult to answer.  One of the most famous examples of this is the question of the discovery of oxygen. While Carl Wilhelm Scheele and Joseph Priestley were able to concentrate oxygen in the laboratory and characterize its properties, they did not recognize it as a component of air.  Priestly actually thought it was missing a hypothetical component of air, known as phlogiston, which air was supposed to absorb from materials that are being burned. It was only several years later that Antoine Lavoisier first conceived of the modern notion of oxygen—as a substance that is consumed from the air in the processes of burning and respiration.
+By the late 20th century, scientific research has become a large-scale effort, largely accomplished in institutional teams.  The amount and frequency of inter-team collaboration has continued to increase, especially after the rise of the Internet, which is a central tool for the modern scientific community. This further complicates the notion of individual accomplishment in science.
+
+== See also ==
+Historiography of science
+Inquiry
+Scientific method
+
+== References ==