Joseph Agassi. The Very Idea of Modern Science: Francis Bacon and Robert Boyle. (Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, 298.) xvii + 315 pp., bibl., index. Dordrecht: Springer, 2015. $159 (cloth).

Isis ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 107 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Segre
Keyword(s):  
History Of Science ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Francis Bacon ◽  
Robert Boyle ◽  
History Of

The Works of Francis Bacon: A Victorian Classic in the History of Science

Isis ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 112 (4) ◽  
pp. 717-736
Author(s):  
Lukas M. Verburgt
Keyword(s):  
History Of Science ◽  
Francis Bacon ◽  
History Of

scholarly journals The History of Science and the History of Knowledge

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-90
Keyword(s):  
History Of Science ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Manhattan Project ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Contemporary History ◽  
History Of Knowledge ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
History Of ◽  
High Level

The article examines the state of the history of science as a discipline and its objectives in the context of its origins and current transformations. The establishment of this discipline and its assumptions about the nature of science together with its goals and structure are briefly discussed. The history of science became a discipline only at the beginning of the second half of the 20th century, and its start is associated with the work of chemist James Conant, a high-level administrator in Manhattan project who was also president of Harvard University and a high-ranking bureaucrat. It was based also on the narrative developed by Alfred North Whitehead, Edwin Burtt, Alexandre Koyré and other historians of science, which claimed modern science was the creator of modernity and a necessary condition for the geopolitical domination of the West. In that understanding, modern science meant science since the time of Galileo and Newton. The author provides a critical analysis of this foundation narrative for the discipline and of its consequences while showing how contemporary history of science has overcome it. The contradiction between modernism and historicism has been resolved in favor of the latter. A key role in this was played by the book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn, which held the potential to undo the presumed monolithic unity of science by rejecting teleology and introducing incommensurability and discontinuities into the historical process. By rejecting explanation of the knowledge of other times and places in terms of modern science, the discipline faced a radical multiplication of independent types of knowledge. This was facilitated by the reorientation to the study of knowledge practices that took place in the 1980s. As a result, the subject matter of the history of science began to erode, and this launched discussion of the prospects for a transition to a history of knowledge based on the study of practices. The sweep of this change of vision is illustrated by the example of classifying sciences according to both their subject matter and the similarities in their research practices. Finally, the advantages and disadvantages of the new discipline along with its prospects and the challenges it faces are discussed.

scholarly journals Making the History of Early Modern Science: Reflections on a Discipline in the Age of Globalization

2015 ◽  
Vol 70 (02) ◽  
pp. 307-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonella Romano
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
History Of Science ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Early Modern Period ◽  
Homogeneous Field ◽  
Early Modern Science ◽  
Anthropology Of Science ◽  
Change Of Scale ◽  
History Of

Abstract What kind of history is the history of science? To what extent does the academic research labeled as such delineate a homogeneous field? What are the current challenges that it faces? The recent translation of Simon Schaffer’s works into French, along with the publication of his 2014 Marc Bloch Lecture in the Annales, provides the framework for this article’s historiographical reflection on the profound changes that have taken place within the discipline over the last thirty years, particularly within a French context. The analysis is twofold. First, it aims to trace how new approaches to the sociology and anthropology of science have reconfigured the boundaries of the discipline. Second, it considers the effect of the abandonment of one of its major historiographical paradigms by most of the scholars currently working on early modern science: the scientific revolution as the rise of scientific modernity, underpinned by a Eurocentric vision of the production of knowledge. Although most research on the early modern period now strives to distance itself from this narrative, it must also face new challenges and questions—in particular the role of science in the processes of globalization and the multiplicity of sites and social configurations that participate in this change of scale. These challenges point towards new methods and styles in the history of science and, more broadly, the social sciences.

Celebrating the 100th Anniversary of Ferroelectricity

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (9) ◽  
pp. 2-3
Author(s):  
Jaichan LEE
Keyword(s):  
History Of Science ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
New Age ◽  
100Th Anniversary ◽  
Look Back ◽  
History Of ◽  
Quantum Behavior ◽  
Collective Phenomenon

It is 100 years when we think about the history of ferroelectricity. We, who study ferroelectricity, are honored and pleased to share the 100-year anniversary of ferroelectricity and recall its history. At this great moment, we look back to the brief history on the verge of ferroelectricity. Our hope is that ferroelectricity studied as an early collective phenomenon will be coupled with quantum behavior, the essence of modern science, to become a new age in the history of science and technology.

scholarly journals Boyling over: a commentary on the preceding papers

1999 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
GEOFFREY CANTOR
Keyword(s):  
History Of Science ◽  
British Society ◽  
Historical Evidence ◽  
Robert Boyle ◽  
History Of

When Michael Hunter first publicized the idea of ‘Psychoanalysing Robert Boyle’ I understood that his main aim was to test three competing psychoanalytical theories against the historical evidence provided by the life and work of Robert Boyle. Although this would have been a valuable exercise, and one that the British Society for the History of Science meeting partly engaged, the papers by Brett Kahr, John Clay and Karl Figlio published here raise some far more compelling issues which I shall explore in the ensuing discussion. Before turning to this discussion I offer a few introductory remarks.

History of Science: The Beginnings of Modern Science from 1450 to 1800

JAMA ◽  
1964 ◽  
Vol 190 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Clovis Hirning ◽  
Lester S. King
Keyword(s):  
History Of Science ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
History Of
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document