Sociology

Indeed, scientists are objective, this is essential to maintain integrity in their field of work. Nonetheless, science also has a human side, although the individual scientists might look as if they are working alone or detached from the rest of society, they are still part of the society and are specifically included in a scientific community (Cotgrove, 1970). According to Anderson and Buck (1980), it is the human side that forms scientific communities. This could be reflected on the manner in which scientists treat science. The interpersonal relationships between scientists are reflected in their discourse more particularly in the way they convey a judgment. Lewin (2005) highlighted how scientists make use of polite remarks when giving comments to other scientists works. This undermines what Fagan (2009) stressed about Flecks theory regarding the shared values among scientists. Thus, science as a field of study may not be as objective as it was thought to be, especially since there is a dynamic interaction among the scientists, researchers, academicians and even corporations or research sponsors.
It is inevitable that a particular product of science could be made without the collective help of other scientists or other people (Cotgrove, 1970). Scientific inquiry is made through the connection established by the scientist to the surroundings, which includes other people and the environment (Mcgin  Roth, 1999). To this end, seeing science as something that is only socially derived rather than objectively discovered implies the importance of community or the social structures for science to be effective.
Lewin (2005), Cotgrove (1970), Anderson and Buck (1980), Mcgin and Roth (1999), and Fagan (2009), explicitly mentioned the fact that science is affected and is derived from the society. However, they did not try to dwell deeper on how social structures affected the scientific discourse. Lewin talked about how scientific discourse is an institutionalized genre for expressing criticism (723). Lewin focused on how criticisms are made, not about how criticisms worked as a reflection of the scientific discourse. Anderson and Buck looked into the Third World scenarios which reflected the scientific development not on the scientific discourse involved. Fagan stressed how values were shared in the society but did not address the impact of the shared value to the context of scientific discourse.
In order to examine this relationship, I would use Lewins study of comments and judgments in scientific discourse to analyze how the tension between interpersonal considerations and objectivity in science may affect how science is construed (Lewin, 2005 724). This could help reveal how the norms in science are derived on organizational structures. I would also like to include the review made by Anderson and Buck (1980) regarding how science is treated and perceived in Third World countries, to clarify and examine how the development of science is dependent on the society. My objective would be to find the difference between the discourse used by scientists in Third World countries and in developed countries to show how social structure affects scientific discourse.