Modernity institutionalises doubt, making all knowledge claims inherently circular

Evidence

Although its originators looked for certainties to replace preestablished dogmas, modernity effectively involves the institutionalisation of doubt. All knowledge claims, in conditions of modernity, are inherently circular, although “circularity” has a different connotation in the natural as compared to the social sciences. In the former, it concerns the fact that science is pure method, such that all substantive forms of “accepted knowledge” are in principle open to being discarded. The social sciences presume a circularity in a twofold sense, which is constitutively fundamental to modern institutions. The knowledge claims they produce are all in principle revisable, but also become “revised” in a practical sense as they circulate in and out of the environment they describe. — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 408

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the specific senses of ‘circularity’ of knowledge claims in natural versus social science.
• XREF: The double circularity of social-science claims—revisable yet also practically revised as they circulate through their own subject—bears on how institutional trust reproduces itself rather than being checked. — connects to: The feeling that systematic knowledge is impossible stems from uncontrollable modern events, not epistemology — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 19; Modernity’s reflexivity makes its own rational grounds ultimately puzzling — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 124; Modernity’s core is an irreducible enigma that cannot be overcome — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 124 (+6 more)

Related

• Modernity’s reflexivity makes its own rational grounds ultimately puzzling (similarity 0.88)
• Circular theory that merely reaffirms known political conclusions produces no new knowledge. (similarity 0.88)
• Modernity’s reflexivity subverts reason’s claim to certitude. (similarity 0.88)
• Modernity’s core is an irreducible enigma that cannot be overcome (similarity 0.88)
• New social knowledge alters the social world rather than merely describing it (similarity 0.87)
• Knowledge of the social world makes that world inherently unstable (similarity 0.85)
• The feeling that systematic knowledge is impossible stems from uncontrollable modern events, not epistemology (similarity 0.85)
• Under modernity no knowledge is certain, in any science. (similarity 0.83)
• Truth-telling critical work produces new knowledges rather than circular confirmations of known positions. (similarity 0.81)
• Modernity is defined by wholesale reflexivity, not merely love of the new. (similarity 0.81)
• Knowledge of social life does not produce greater control over fate (similarity 0.80)
• Social science is more deeply implicated in modernity than natural science. (similarity 0.80)
• Modernity’s reflexivity rests on cultural commitment and power, not pure reason (similarity 0.79)
• Social science knowledge changes the social world it studies. (similarity 0.79)
• Modern knowledge is more opaque to individuals than pre-modern local knowledge was (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Modernity’s reflexivity makes its own rational grounds ultimately puzzling #expands (0.70) — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 124
• Modernity’s core is an irreducible enigma that cannot be overcome #corroborates (0.60) — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 124
• The feeling that systematic knowledge is impossible stems from uncontrollable modern events, not epistemology #complicates (0.55) — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 19
• Knowledge of the social world makes that world inherently unstable #expands (0.45) — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 115