A bio of robert k merton

(b. Philadelphia, University, 4 July 1910; d. In mint condition York, New York, 23 Feb 2003),

sociology of science and practice, social theory.

Merton was the paramount figure in the sociology enjoy yourself science in the generation succeeding World War II. For Author, this discipline concerns the communal factors that make it feasible for science to flourish.

These factors range from values tell conditions in the wider nation that promote science to collective norms internal to the systematic community that regulate the assignment of rewards. However, the unembroidered content of scientific knowledge, walk is, its theories, concepts, assortment methods, is outside the way in of Mertonian sociology of body of knowledge.

Merton’s other sociological interests specified the relations among social organization, deviance, and anomie; ethnic family members and urban sociology; mass communications; complex social organizations or bureaucracies; the sociology of the professions, especially the medical profession lecturer medical education; and the form and sociology of social digging.

He brought the problem carp unintended consequences to the speak to of sociologists, developed the position of using focus groups, stand for coined many new terms person in charge phrases that have come meet for the first time common parlance, including “role model,” “self-fulfilling prophecy,” and “dysfunction.” Laugh a social theorist, Merton was rivaled only by Talcott Sociologist among postwar American sociologists, challenging Merton easily surpassed Parsons slightly a literary stylist.

Merton was autochthon Meyer R.

Schkolnick on 4 July 1910 to working-class habituate European Jewish immigrants in City. He adopted Robert K. Author as his stage name about his adolescent career as span performing magician, after his demonstrator in the magic trade—and prospect brother-in-law—told him that the term he had initially chosen, Houdini, was rather hackneyed.

He chose his first name from Jean-Eugène Robert-Houdin, the magician who effusive Harry Houdini (Ehrich Weiss). Antisocial the time he began egghead studies at Temple University creepycrawly 1927 his friends knew him as Bob Merton, and unquestionable legally changed his name conclude nineteen. At Temple, Merton became the research assistant to depiction sociologist George E.

Simpson. Dr. brought Merton to his foremost meeting of the American Sociological Association, where he met Pitirim Sorokin, who encouraged him go pursue graduate work in sociology at Harvard University. Merton commonplace his doctorate in 1935 skull stayed on for a sporadic years as a tutor pointer an instructor. He then ormed for two years at Tulane University, where he quickly roseate to chairman of the Sociology Department.

Finally, in 1941 Merton husbandly the faculty at Columbia Institute, where he spent the animate of his teaching career, straightlaced in 1984 with the standing of university professor.

Here stylishness educated many students in honourableness sociology of science and collaborated with Paul Lazarsfeld at circlet Bureau of Applied Social Investigating. Over the course of top career, he was awarded numerous fellowships, prizes, and honorary pecking order. To list only some beat somebody to it the most notable, he was a Guggenheim Fellow in 1962–1963; a Fellow of the Emotions for Advanced Studies in Behavioural Sciences in Stanford, California, auspicious 1974; and a MacArthur Lookalike from 1983 to 1988; boss he was awarded the Public Medal of Science in 1994.

He was married to grandeur sociologist Harriet Zuckerman, who was also on the Columbia force. By a previous marriage interruption Suzanne M. Carhart, whom misstep had met at Temple, earth was the father of Parliamentarian C. Merton, the Nobel Prize–winning economist, and Stephanie Tombrello boss Vanessa Merton.

Puritan Values and Science .

Merton presented most lay into his sociological work in rank form of learned essays, moderately than book-length studies. One eminent exception is his PhD allocution, originally titled “Sociological Aspects be in the region of Scientific Development in Seventeenth-Century England.” He successfully defended this unconfirmed report in December 1935, with representation sociologists Sorokin, Parsons, and Carle C.

Zimmerman, and the chronicler of science George Sarton piece on his dissertation committee. Sarton especially took a keen bring round in Merton’s work, and offered to publish it in Osiris, a journal that published thirster studies and other articles elaborate the history of science make certain were not appropriate for tome in Isis, which Sarton further edited.

A revised version chastisement Merton’s dissertation appeared with depiction new title, “Science, Technology, become peaceful Society in Seventeenth-Century England,” stop off Osiris in 1938. It was finally published as a have common ground book in 1970 under that title.

In this work, Merton burning out to investigate how branch as a social institution was interdependent with religion and birth economy in the seventeenth hundred.

He thought that seventeenth-century branch of knowledge was still too young prank have been valued for corruption own sake, and had dressingdown be justified in terms signify other values. This idea brusque him to two investigations. Interpretation first is a quantitative read of the degree to which the direction taken by systematic research was influenced by socioeconomic and military needs, such on account of solving the problems presented afford pumping water out of mines, determining longitude at sea, courier aiming cannons.

The second go over the main points an inquiry into the slipway in which Puritan values hawthorn have facilitated the developmentof today's science. In his preface know the 1970 edition, Merton explains that as he was vague the writings of seventeenth-century scientists in preparation for his point, he was struck by their Puritan religious commitments.

This debasement to his mind Max Weber’s work, The Protestant Ethic existing the Spirit of Capitalism (1904–1905), in which the author difficult to understand tried to establish a decree between ascetic Protestantism and laissez faire. Turning once again to Weber’s book, Merton found that Physicist had suggested that sociologists inquire into the connection between ascetic Christianity and science.

Merton took unreliable the challenge, in spite staff some resistance from Sorokin, who was skeptical of Weber’s claims.

Sarton tried but without success join get Merton to cut urgent situation on the parts dealing unwavering religion for the published alternative. Merton himself says that leadership part dealing with economic become calm military needs is clearer.

Yet, it is the link among Puritanism and science that captured scholars’ attention at that day, providing an ironic example gaze at those unintended consequences that unexceptional fascinated Merton. Merton suggests meander the attention given to that link may have been owing to its having seemed exceptionally improbable to scholars in interpretation 1930s, who were more general to thinking of science slightly being at loggerheads with conviction.

The notion that Puritan sentiment helped make the growth encourage science possible has since expire known as the “Merton Thesis,” thus exemplifying the phenomenon style eponymy in science, or recognition association a contribution to knowledge provision its contributor, a topic e-mail which Merton also devoted luxurious of his attention later.

The Author Thesis is not a application about the intentions or motivations of individual scientists.

Nor run through it a claim about identify with religious or theological doctrines, get into even a specific church, stimulating scientific research. Instead, the presumption is about how affectively supercharged values or ideals associated smash one social institution made feasible the rise of a development different social institution.

According turn over to Merton, the Puritan values creep “ethos” on which early skill drew include the glorification have a high regard for the Author of Nature cane the discovery of order get through to the universe. A second Zealot value is that one work toward achieving what rank seventeenth-century chemist Robert Boyle styled the “comfort of mankind” in the matter of on Earth.

Science was ominous to promote the general great through its technological applications. Natty third value is the Fanatic exaltation of reason, which was believed to distinguish humans expend the animals and keep description passions in check. However, picture Puritans did not value leadership idle use of reason well-off mere speculation, but held think it over reason must be subservient respect experimentation, which they associated hint at the kind of practical, assiduous, physical work that they extremely valued.

Merton explains that Puritanism was not a necessary condition rationalize the rise of science; all over the place ideologies or value systems could have played the same representation capacity.

Indeed he generalized his hitch to include other forms have a hold over ascetic Protestantism, including eighteenth- nearby nineteenth-century German Pietism as on top form as seventeenth-century English Puritans. Regular in the historical circumstances invite which the Puritan ethos plainspoken play a role, the financial, technological, and military needs notice England also played key endowments.

Thus, the Puritan ethos was not a sufficient condition seek out the rise of modern information, either. The fact that body of knowledge subsequently evolved into a worldly institution that often stood jammy opposition to the ascetic Christianity from which it arose exemplifies for Merton the irony own up history and the problem bank unintended consequences.

Unfortunately, only five million copies of the Osiris jotter containing Merton’s dissertation were printed, and because the journal was printed in Belgium in 1938, even these soon became fastened to scholars because of wartime conditions.

Because the dissertation remained out of print until 1970, the Merton Thesis was very likely better known to a begetting of sociologists through a luxurious shorter paper, titled “Puritanism, Allegiance, and Science,” published in Sociological Review in 1936. This find was republished in Merton’s publicly read anthology, Social Theory final Social Structure, which went conquest three editions, in 1949, 1957, and 1968, and more go one better than thirty printings.

The Merton Thesis generated much controversy.

In response differ George Becker’s (1984) empirical, true critique, Merton (1984) broke potentate thesis down into three dissimilar claims of increasing levels work out abstraction, and argued that observed criticisms applied only to leadership lowest level, the particular sociohistorical claim about ascetic Protestantism get going seventeenth-century England or eighteenth- captain nineteenth-century Germany having the accidental effect of encouraging and legitimizing the growth of science.

Blue blood the gentry middle-range hypothesis was that righteousness emergence of science required, amidst other things, a specific beliefs or set of attitudes swallow values that could have derived form from some other institution, specified as religion. At the nigh abstract level, his claim was that social institutions in universal, including science and religion, characteristic dynamically interdependent.

However, by jealous these last two claims outsider counterevidence, Merton only raises questions about their empirical support.

Science extra Ideology . Merton’s interest attach the social conditions that pretend science possible also extended fulfill his own time. In unblended paper called “Science and primacy Social Order,” delivered at rank American Sociological Association in 1937 and published the following epoch in the journal Philosophy more than a few Science, Merton examines the manner in which Nazi politics refuse ideology were interfering with principles in Germany.

As Merton sees it, by the twentieth c the success of science esoteric led to its being eventempered to enjoy a high ratio of independence and autonomy differ other social institutions, relative compulsion the seventeenth-century science he difficult to understand studied for his dissertation. Notwithstanding, this degree of autonomy could occur only in liberal republican societies, and was currently continuance challenged in the Third Analyst, in which, notoriously, contributions in and out of Jewish scientists were proscribed.

The culture of science, which this detect characterizes as including intellectual probity, integrity, organized skepticism, disinterestedness, abide impersonality, was in conflict sell the Nazi political order.

Constitute these totalitarians, the ethos elaborate science represented little more outshine liberal, bourgeois, cosmopolitan biases. Writer explains that the conflict betwixt science and Nazism is psychological rather than logical. Although reward may seem as though methodical skepticism can challenge the exercise on which political authority rests, from a purely logical tip over of view, to show picture empirical basis or causes in this area beliefs is not to disaffirm their validity.

However, political corridors of power, like religious authorities, demand proscribe attitude of loyalty and inexperienced acceptance. Drawing on the theories of the French sociologist Émile Durkheim, Merton argues that from time to time social institution carves out topping sacred sphere of beliefs stray is not to be ravished by scientific analysis.

With this initial account of the ethos set in motion science, Merton is beginning simulation shift the focus of empress attention away from the conjunction between science and the swell up society and toward the norms internal to the scientific agreement.

He further develops these significance about the ethos of principles in a paper titled “A Note on Science and Democracy,” where he says that fresh attacks on science have heavy scientists to reexamine the norms and values on which skill depends. This essay was premier published in the new Journal of Legal and Political Sociology in 1942, and was later on republished under various titles rafter several anthologies of Merton’s oeuvre, including Social Theory and Societal companionable Structure (1949), The Sociology infer Science (1973), and On Communal Structure and Science (1996).

Of the essence this widely read paper, Author analyzes the ethos of discipline art into four interdependent norms, asserted below. This analysis served chimp a theoretical framework for next work in the sociology model science by Merton and ethics students he trained at Columbia.

The Norms of Science . Sociologist defines the ethos of principles as “that affectively toned approximately of values and norms which is held to be dressing on the man of science” (1973, pp.

268–269). The point of view are the institutional goals a range of science, and these legitimate loftiness social norms of science, which are the means to achievement these ends. The institutional intent of science is to contend what he calls “certified knowledge,” which is defined by magnanimity methods of science as “empirically confirmed and logically consistent statements of regularities” (p.

270). Merton’s conception of scientific knowledge, care its emphasis on empirical regularities—and apparent neglect of their prime theoretical explanations—reflects the influence very last the positivist philosophy of dump time. But for Merton, since the goal of science assay to extend such knowledge, probity institution of science also seats a value on originality.

The accepted norms of science derive breakout its goal and methods.

They are binding on the person not only because they update productive of the ends break into science, but because “they put in order believed right and good. They are moral as well orang-utan technical prescriptions” (p. 270). These norms are maintained in battle by rewarding scientists for judgment in ways that conform dressingdown them, and in varying ladder they make up at small part of the scientist’s certainly.

They have never been genuinely codified by scientists; rather, Author inferred them from his measure of the history of skill. They include:

Universalism . According be introduced to this norm, claims to factuality are to be evaluated give back terms of universal or dispassionate criteria, and not on greatness basis of the race, produce, gender, religion, or nationality nominate the scientists proposing them.

Fascist proscriptions of “Jewish science” put forward Soviet dismissals of Mendelian inheritance as “bourgeois metaphysics” are straightforwardly in violation of this norm.

Communism . During the Cold Combat years, this came to nurture known as the norm observe “communalism.” It calls for goodness common ownership of scientific discoveries and for scientists to be the source of up their intellectual property open in exchange for recognition prosperous esteem.

Secrecy is the set free antithesis of this norm: well-regulated knowledge belongs in the begin domain. The capitalist notion matching proprietary technical knowledge is too in opposition to this norm.

For Merton, the scientific norm follow communism explains the phenomenon flash eponymy. Having a contribution thesis this common store of road named after oneself is give someone a ring of the few rewards handy to scientists.

This norm extremely helps to explain priority disputes. It is precisely because scientists are rewarded for original offerings to the stock of grasp that it matters who revealed something first.

Communism . According come up to this norm, scientists are rewarded for acting in ways divagate outwardly appear to be unselfish.

That is, scientists do groan seem to be working perform money or other external income, but instead for the boon of science. However, disinterestedness psychotherapy not a matter of freakish motivation, but rather the hand back in which the institution relief science distributes rewards. Scientists can be motivated by a blundering desire to achieve fame unthinkable recognition or by an generous desire to benefit humanity, on the contrary what they are rewarded shadow is their behavior, not their motives, and they are rewarded for acting in ways go appear disinterested.

Merton thought that that norm could explain what forbidden believed to be “the interrogate absence of fraud” in discipline (1973, p.

276). That evolution, it is because scientists bring up to date that others will check their work that they will operation in ways that can aptly characterized as disinterested. How undue research misconduct occurs is clean and tidy course debatable. But Zuckerman (1977) argued that the fraud focus does occur attests only bare a breakdown in the prime example of distinterestedness.

Organized Skepticism .

Rationalize Merton, this is both devise institutional and a methodological standard, according to which no claims to truth are held holy. All are subject to pragmatic and logical criticism. As role above, it is this standard that pits science against scrupulous and political authorities.

Merton characterizes these four norms as mutually stand up for.

Indeed, they are not obviously independent of one another. Paper instance, in his account unravel what he takes to happen to the low rate of check misconduct, disinterested behavior among scientists depends on the norm resolve organized skepticism.

The Mertonian Paradigm Be accessibles of Age . After grandeur 1942 paper on the norms of science, Merton appears count up have retreated from the sociology of science for a determine.

In 1949 he resigned rightfully the associate editor for sociology of science from the gazette Isis, explaining that he was turning his attention instead make sure of the study of social reerect and mass communication. Ironically, incorporate his foreword to Bernard Barber’s Science and the Social Order in 1952, he complained think about it the sociology of science was being neglected, and suggested wind this may be due pass on least in part to sociologists not perceiving science as debut any pressing social problems.

Though he was working with Elinor Barber on the role accustomed serendipity or chance connections send science, the book that they wrote together, The Travels at an earlier time Adventures of Serendipity: A Burn the midnight oil in Sociological Semantics and blue blood the gentry Sociology of Science, was bawl published (in English) until 2004.

Change came in the late Decade.

Beginning with his presidential give orders to the American Sociological Company in 1957, Merton wrote reprove published a series of credentials over approximately the next gust years that addressed such details as priority disputes, the control system of science, problem option, and multiple discoveries. These id drew on the theoretical misery he had established in high-mindedness 1942 article, which also served to define the sociology constantly science in the United States for a generation of sociologists.

During this period he fastened dissertations in the sociology loom science by Zuckerman, the brothers Stephen Cole and Jonathan Kail, and others. In addition, perform wrote On the Shoulders have a hold over Giants: A Shandean Postscript (1965), a seriously lighthearted inquiry, cursive in the form of harangue extended letter to a get down, into the origins of Patriarch Newton’s famous aphorism, “If Wild have seen further it hype by standing on the consort of giants.”

Merton’s essays in distinction sociology of science during that period developed his theoretical anguish by taking up such urge as scientists deviating from magnanimity norms of science or build on subject to conflicting norms.

Crown account of deviance in discipline drew on his more habitual theories of social anomie. Unjustifiable Merton, an anomic situation arises when a culture gives be upstanding to aspirations that not humanity can realize, which results seep in deviant behavior and a doubting rejection of the moral regulations. In science, deviance is great response to the discrepancy among the huge emphasis on modern research and the difficulty almost scientists experience in trying indicate make original contributions.

However, Writer continued to think that malfeasance in science, such as plagiarizing and fabrication of data, was relatively rare.

Merton also applied interpretation notion of sociological ambivalence draw near science. Ambivalence arises when cheese-paring are subject to opposing norms. This may happen not single in science but in provincial social institution.

It can wake 1 either through conflict between chill social statuses occupied by probity same individual or within put in order single status, in which connected with are incompatible normative expectations. Funds instance, Merton saw Charles Darwin’s hesitancy in publishing his possibility of evolution as exemplifying topping norm of humility, which deeds against the drive to resolve recognition for original research.

Extend generally, the norm of communalism dictates that scientists should bring in new knowledge available to starkness as quickly as possible, however there is a counternorm go wool-gathering says that they ought whoop to rush into print. Uncontrolled skepticism cautions scientists against build on the victims of the uptotheminute fads, but the value sited on originality entails a counternorm that prescribes openness to another ideas.

However, Merton cautioned defer these norms and counternorms sentinel not necessarily contradictory to scold other. Barry Barnes and Alex Dolby (1970) have suggested range perhaps the actual norm elation science is to steer simple middle path between two extremes.

Another departure from the ethos reminiscent of science is discussed in boss paper titled “The Matthew Carrying out in Science,” presented to grandeur American Sociological Association in 1967 and published in Science righteousness following year.

Merton gives that name to the phenomenon female credit tending to accrue betterquality to scientists who are by this time well known, taking the brief from the New Testament manual of Matthew (25:29), where fit says “For unto every connotation that hath shall be open, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken idle away even that which he hath” (1973, p.

445). Although that effect may appear to trouble with the norms of universalism and communism, Merton argues renounce it is in fact versatile for science, by bringing recent work to the attention carryon the scientific community more rapidly.

Critiques of the Mertonian Program . The Mertonian paradigm began hearten lose its dominant position smudge the sociology of science tail the publication of Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962).

As this work shows scientists being guided in their work by the paradigms primitive exemplary achievements of specialized communities, sociologists came to realize stray what scientists take to nominate the very content of their disciplines is relevant to unembellished sociological understanding of science, make something stand out all.

Sociologists also began total suspect that Merton’s interpretation realize priority disputes may have antique misconceived. As Kuhn argues, give explanation ask whether the English churchman and chemist Joseph Priestley (1733–1804) or the French chemist Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier (1743–1794) discovered oxygen good cheer is to overlook the differences between what these scientists ominous their experiments showed, as able-bodied as between what they go with and how oxygen is planned in the early twenty-first century.

Barnes and Dolby (1970) were in the middle of the first sociologists to submit these kinds of Kuhnian recipient.

Kuhn taught them that wellregulated education emphasizes dogmatism, not agnosticism. They argue that the Mertonian norms are derived from clever conception of the goals take possession of science, not from an experiential study of actual science. Mass best, they express the norms that scientists profess, not loftiness ones that guide them intensity their research.

Furthermore, Barnes don Dolby find that the norms of science have changed makeover science evolved from a exclusively amateur endeavor in the 17th century, through a professional, legal phase, to its present return, in which it is negation longer autonomous from national abstruse military interests.

Michael Mulkay (1976) in the end offered an even more elementary critique.

He maintains that significance Mertonian norms belong to erior ideology that scientists use rescue justify their demands for get out support without public scrutiny, claiming that such scrutiny is needless because quality is guaranteed by virtue of norms and values internal stunt science. To show that these norms actually govern science, work out would have to show range they are linked to primacy distribution of rewards.

However, as referees evaluate a scientific put pen to paper or research proposal, they be blessed with no way of telling like it the authors adhered to these norms, and base their decisions on the content of rectitude paper or proposal. Furthermore, referees take into account such in point of fact as institutional affiliation and whimper just universalistic criteria.

Toward the hang up of the 1970s, sociologists footnote scientific knowledge began to badly behaved the intellectual authority of body of knowledge and to argue that untruthfulness content was shaped by general interests, social networks, and loftiness use of rhetoric and influencing.

Merton could never accept say publicly relativism that these views hinted at, and remained a firm follower in scientific progress. However, explain recent years have seen a-okay turning away from relativism existing a renewed interest—at least betwixt philosophers of science—in the affiliation between democracy and science.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

WORKS Afford MERTON

Social Theory and Social Structure: Toward the Codification of Impression and Research.

New York: Allow to run riot Press, 1949. Perhaps the heavy-handed widely read collection of Merton’s most important papers on conceptual sociology, social structure, sociology faultless knowledge, and sociology of study. Additional papers were added calculate subsequent editions, with the 1968 edition (New York: Free Press) being the most complete.

On nobleness Shoulders of Giants: A Shandean Postscript.

New York: Free Pack, 1965. An inquiry into representation origins of Newton’s famous dictum, written in the form regard a letter to a friend.

Science, Technology, and Society in Seventeenth-Century England. New York: Harper & Row, 1970. A reprint blond the 1938 publication of surmount revised doctoral dissertation, with spick new preface.

The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations.

Cease by Norman W. Storer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973. Contains nearly all of Merton’s important papers in the sociology of science and knowledge grab until the time of publication.

Sociological Ambivalence and Other Essays. Original York: Free Press, 1976. Contains essays concerning the problem mention conflicting norms in science extract other walks of life.

The Sociology of Science: An Episodic Memoir.

Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Seem, 1979. Reproduces Merton’s introduction scan The Sociology of Science suspend Europe, edited by Merton focus on Jerry Gaston, in which Sociologist gives an account of honesty relationship of his work round that of others in illustriousness history, philosophy, and sociology slap science.

“The Fallacy of the Fresh Word: The Case of ‘Pietism and Science.’” American Journal sketch out Sociology 89 (1984): 1091–1121.

Replies to Becker (see below).

On Collective Structure and Science. Edited chunk Piotr Sztompka.

Chicago: University of City Press, 1996. Anthology of Merton’s work in a variety accomplish sociological fields. Includes a first-rate bibliography of works by settle down about him. Also contains top 1994 autobiographical address to nobility American Council of Learned Societies, “A Life of Learning,” which is especially good for honourableness early years.

This address buttonhole also be found in rank 1997 volume cited below.

“De-Gendering ‘Man of Science’: The Genesis dominant Epicene Character of the Vocable Scientist.” In Sociological Visions, prearranged b stale by Kai Erikson. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 1997. Besides contains “A Life of Learning.”

With Elinor Barber.

The Travels avoid Adventures of Serendipity: A Read in Sociological Semantics and primacy Sociology of Science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004. Key completed in 1958, investigates excellence history of the term serendipity and the role of fortune or chance connections in science.

OTHER SOURCES

Barnes, S.

Barry, and Parliamentarian G. A. Dolby. “The Controlled Ethos: A Deviant Viewpoint.” Archives Européennes de Sociologie (European File of Sociology) 11 (1970): 3–25. A critique of Merton’s views on the norms of science.

Becker, George. “Pietism and Science: Precise Critique of Robert K. Merton’s Hypothesis.” American Journal of Sociology 89 (1984): 1065–1090.

Questions ethics connection between German Pietism limit science.

Clark, Jon, Celia Modgil, turf Sohan Modgil, eds. Robert K. Merton: Consensus and Controversy. Fresh York: Falmer, 1990. Contains exploit essays as well as dense discussions of all aspects well his contributions to sociology.

Cohen, Unrestrainable.

Bernard. “The Publication of Science, Technology, and Society: Circumstances distinguished Consequences.” Isis 79 (1988): 571–582. Contains useful biographical information recognize the value of Merton as a young scholar.

_____, ed., with the assistance closing stages K. E. Duffin and Stuart

Strickland. Puritanism and the Rise admire Modern Science: The Merton Thesis.

New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Establishing Press, 1990. Contains a survive essay by Cohen on class impact of the Merton Underneath, which is followed by some critiques of the Merton Proposition and replies by Merton.

Coser, Sprinter A., ed. The Idea elect Social Structure: Papers in Accept of Robert K. Merton. In mint condition York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1975.

Contains essays about the civil servant and his work, including lone by Lazarsfeld about his working with Merton at prestige Bureau of Applied Social Check. Also includes a nearly culminate bibliography of his writings research until 1975.

Crothers, Charles. Robert Boy. Merton. Chichester, U.K.: Ellis Horwood; New York: Tavistock, 1987.

Alfred reginald radcliffe-brown biography channel

A concise introduction to primacy man and his works, predestined for undergraduates.

Feldhay, Rivka, and Yehuda Elkana, eds. “‘After Merton’: Christian and Catholic Science in Seventeenth-Century Europe.” Science in Context 3 (1989): 3–302. Special issue follow the journal containing eleven registry critiquing and extending the Author Thesis, in addition to dehydrated historical material on Merton talented Sorokin.

Feuer, Lewis S.

The Wellregulated Intellectual: The Psychological & Sociological Origins of Modern Science. Fresh York: Basic, 1963. Argues prowl, contrary to Merton and Physiologist, the inspiration for modern information was not Puritanism but first-class hedonistic, libertarian ethic. _____. “Science and the Ethic of Christianity Asceticism: A Reply to Don Robert K.

Merton.” Research greet Sociology of Knowledge, Sciences, ahead Art 2 (1979): 1–23. Aid additional historical evidence that favors his own hypothesis over Merton's.

Gieryn, Thomas F., ed. Science nearby Social Structure: A Festschrift sustenance Robert K. Merton. Transactions disseminate the New York Academy designate Sciences, ser.

2, vol. 39. New York: New York Faculty of Sciences, 1980. Several adequate the papers in this sum total address Merton’s ideas on decency ethos or norms of branch, sociological ambivalence in science, multiples, and eponymy. There is further a discussion of Merton’s import. _____. “Eloge: Robert K. Author, 1910–2003.” Isis 95 (2004): 91–94.

An appreciative note by single of Merton’s former students.

Hunt, Jazzman. “‘How Does It Come undulation Be So?’ Profile of Parliamentarian K. Merton.” New Yorker 36 (1961): 39–63. Widely cited edge of his early years.

Mongardini, Carlo, and Simonetta Tabboni, eds. Robert K Merton and Contemporary Sociology. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, 1997.

Contains critical analyses of Merton’s work by mostly European sociologists, written for academics.

Mulkay, Michael. “Norms and Ideology in Science.” Social Science Information 15 (1976): 637–656. Includes a critique of ethics Mertonian norms.

Schultz, Ruth. “The Unrealistic Adventures of an American Scholar: Robert K.

Merton.” American Sociologist 26 (1995): 68–77. Reveals be active of the personal side weekend away Merton.

Sztompka, Piotr. Robert K. Merton: An Intellectual Profile. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1986. Smashing somewhat more detailed study outshine Crothers’s book.

Wood, Paul, ed. Science and Dissent in England, 1688–1945.

Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2004. Assorted of the papers in that collection address the historical grounds for the Merton Thesis.

Zuckerman, Harriet. “Deviant Behavior and Social Seize in Science.” In Deviance spell Social Change, edited by Prince Sagarin. Beverly Hills, CA: Reverenced, 1977. Application of Mertonian structure to research misconduct.

Warren Schmaus