Themata in science and in common sense

Ivana Marková

doi:10.1515/kjps-2017-0011

Abstract

Human thinking is heterogeneous, and among its different forms, thinking in dyadic oppositions is associated with the concept of themata. Gerald Holton characterises themata as elements that lie beneath the structure and development of physical theories as well as of non-scientific thinking. Themata have different uses, such as a thematic concept, or a thematic component of the concept; a methodological (or epistemological) thema; and a propositional thema. Serge Moscovici has placed the concept of themata in the heart of his theory of social representations which is based on ‘natural thinking’ and on forms of daily knowing, including common sense. In this article I shall explore some features of thematic concepts and of methodological themata in scientific theories and in common sense. More specifically, I shall refer to the significance of the methodological (or epistemological) thema the Self and Other(s) in common-sense thinking and in social practices.

References

Benedict, R. (1942). Race and Racism. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bohr, N. (1949). Discussion with Einstein on epistemological problems in atomic physics. In P. A. Schilpp (Ed.), Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist. New York: Tudor Publishing Company, pp. 199–241.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bohr, N. (1955). Science and the unity of knowledge. In L. Leary (ed.). Unity of Knowledge. New York: Doubleday, pp. 47–62.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bohr, N. (1999). Collected Works. Complementarity Beyond Physics (1928–1962). Vol. 10. Ed. D. Favrholdt. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Crivellato, E. and Ribatti, D. (2008). Body symmetry and asymmetry in early Greek anatomical reasoning. Clinical Anatomy, 21, 279–282.10.1002/ca.20626
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Elkana, Y. (1982). The myth of simplicity. In G. Holton and Y. Elkana (eds.). Albert Einstein: Historical and Cultural Perspectives. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 205–251.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Faucheux, C. and Moscovici, S. (1962). Remarques critiques sur la « question microsociale». Arguments, 6, 19–27.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Galam, S. and Moscovici, S. (1991). Towards a theory of collective phenomena: consensus and attitude changes in group. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 49–74.10.1002/ejsp.2420210105
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Galam, S. and Moscovici, S. (1994). Towards a theory of collective phenomena. II: Conformity and power. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 481–495.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Galam, S. and Moscovici, S. (1995). Towards a theory of collective phenomena: III: Conflicts and forms of power. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 217–229.10.1002/ejsp.2420250207
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Holton, G. (1973). Introduction to Concepts and Theories in Physical Science. Second Edition. Reading Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Holton, G. (1974). Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Holton, G. (1975). On the Role of Themata in Scientific Thought. Science, 188, (4186), 328–334.10.1126/science.188.4186.328
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Holton, G. (1978). The Scientific Imagination. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Husserl, E. (1913/1962). Ideas : General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology, Trsl. W. R. Boyce Gibson. London and New York: Collier, Macmillan.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ichheiser, G. (1940). The image of the other man: A study in social psychology. Sociometry, 111, 277–291.10.2307/2785155
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ichheiser, G. (1949). Misunderstandings in human relations: A study in false social perceptions. Supplement to the September issue of the American Journal of Sociology, Chicago: University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ichheiser, G. (1951). Misunderstandings in international relations. American Sociological Review, 16, 311–316.10.2307/2087603
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jesuino, J.C. (2008). Linking science to common sense. Journal for the Theory of Social Representations, 38, 393–409.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Joffe, H. (2011). Public apprehension of emerging infectious diseases: are changes afoot? Public Understanding of Science, 20, 446–460.10.1177/0963662510391604
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Joffe, H. and Haarhoff, G. (2002). Representations of far-flung illnesses: the case of Ebola in Britain. Social Science & Medicine, 54, 955–696.10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00068-5
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Joffe, H., Rossetto, T., Solberg, C., and O’Connor, C. (2013). Social Representations of Earthquakes: A Study of People Living in Three Highly Seismic Areas. Earthquake Spectra, 29, 367–397.10.1193/1.4000138
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Joffe, H., Washer, P., and Solberg, C. (2011). Public engagement with emerging infectious disease: The case of MRSA in Britain. Psychology & Health, 26 (667–683).10.1080/08870441003763238
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lindenberg, S. (1987). Common sense and social structure: a sociological view, in F. van Holthoon and D. R. Olson (eds). Common Sense: Foundation for Social Science. Lanham and New York: University Press of America, pp. 199–215.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lloyd, G.E.R. (1966). Polarity and Analogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marková, I. (2003). Dialogicality and Social Representations: The Dynamics of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marková, I. (2012). Epistemologia delle rappresentazioni sociall. Implicazioni per la ricerca empirica. In I. Galli (ed.). Cinquant’Anni di Rappresentazioni Sociali. Milano: Edizioni Unicopli, pp. 45–57.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marková, I. (2014). Complementarity as an epistemology of life, in B. Wagoner, N. Chaudhary and P. Hviid (eds.). Cultural Psychology and Its Future: Complementarity in a New Key. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing, pp. 33–50.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marková, I. (2016). The Dialogical Mind: Common Sense and Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511753602
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marková, I., Wilkie, P.A., Naji, S., and Forbes, C. (1990). Self- and other-awareness of the risk of HIV/AIDS in people with haemophilia and implications for behavioural change, Social Science and Medicine, 31, 73–79.10.1016/0277-9536(90)90012-H
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marková, I., McKee, K., Power, K. and Moodie, E. (1995). The self, the other and perceived risk: Lay representations of HIV/AIDS in Scottish prisons. In Marková, I. and Farr, R.M. (eds.). Representations of Health, Illness and Handicap. New York: Harwood, pp 111–129.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moloney, G., Hall, R., and Walker, I. (2005). Social representations and themata: The construction and functioning of social knowledge about donation and transplantation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 415–441.10.1348/014466605X42246
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moloney, G., Williams, J. and Blair, D. (2012). Cognitive Polyphasia, Themata and Blood Donation: Between or Within Representation. Papers on Social Representations, 21, 4.1–4.12
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moloney G., Walker, I., and Charlton, T. (2013). Social Understandings of Organ donation: Implications for practice. In M. A. Lauri (ed.) Organ Donation and Transplantation: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Hauppauge NY: Nova Science Publishers, pp. 141–150.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moloney, G., Gamble, M., Hayman, K. and Smith, G. (2015). Without anchor: Themata and blood donation, Papers on Social Representations, 24, 2, 2.1–2.21.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moscovici, S. (1961). La Psychanalyse: son image et son public. [Psychoanalysis: its image and its public]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moscovici, S. (1984). The phenomenon of social representations. In R.M. Farr and S. Moscovici (eds.). Social Representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3–69.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moscovici, S. (1993). Introductory Address. Papers on Social Representations, 2, 160–170.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moscovici, S. (2011). An essay on social representations and ethnic minorities. Social Science Information, 50, 442–461.10.1177/0539018411411027
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moscovici, S. and Hewstone, M. (1983). Social representations and social explanations: From the ‘naïve’ to the ‘amateur’ scientist’, in M. Hewstone (ed.). Attribution Theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 98–125.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moscovici, S. and Vignaux, G. (1994/2000). ‘Le Concept de Thêmata’, in C. Guimelli, Structures et transformations des représentations sociales [Structures and transformations of social representations]. Neuchatel: Delachaux et Niestlé, pp. 25–72. Reprinted in Moscovici, S. Social Representations. Ed. G. Duveen. London: Polity Press, pp. 156–183.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moodie, E., Marková, I. and Plichtová, J. (1995). Lay representations of democracy: A study in two cultures, Culture & Psychology, 1: 423–454.10.1177/1354067X9514002
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Nambu, Y. (2008) Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking in Particle Physics: a Case of Cross-Fertilization. Nobel Prize lecture (http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2008/nambu-slides.pdf.).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ricoeur, P. (1990/1992). Oneself as Another. Trsl. K. Blamey. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Rosenfeld, L. (1963/1979). Niels Bohr’s contribution to epistemology. In Selected Papers of Leon Rosenfeld. Ed. R. S. Cohen and J. J. Stachel. Dordrecht and London: D. Reidel (1979), pp. 522–535.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Smith, N. and Joffe, H. (2013). How the public engages with global warming: a social representations approach. Public Understanding of Science, 22, 16–32.10.1177/0963662512440913
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Smith, N., O’Connor, C. and Joffe, H. (2015). Social representations of threatening phenomena: the self-other thema and identity protection. Papers on Social Representations, 24, 2, 1.1–1.23.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Vico, G. (1744/1948). The New Science of Giambattista Vico. Trsl. T. G. Bergin and M. H. Fisch. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Weyl, H. (1952). Symmetry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400874347
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Whitehead, A. N. (1929/1979). Process and Reality. Ed. D. R. Griffin and D. W. Sherburne. New York and London: Free Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Themata in science and in common sense

Abstract

Paradigm

My account