Canon and the Revolution: The Role of the Concept of Scientific Revolution in Establishing the History of Science as a Discipline
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3986/fv.43.1.07Keywords:
scientific revolution, history of science, historical epistemology, Marxism, Boris Hessen, sociology of scientific knowledge, practical turnAbstract
Slovenian epistemology is characterised by an idiosyncratic canon, based on three fundamental authors: Gaston Bachelard, Alexandre Koyré, and Thomas Kuhn. What binds this canon together is the attitude that the history of science should be viewed as a history of radical breaks or revolutions in scientific thought. The drawback of such an anthology of authors is not only that it is outdated, but that, from the position of this canon, it is difficult to discern the problems stemming from the approach to history of science it endorses. In order to highlight the blind spots of Slovenian epistemology, I examine a different interpretative trajectory of the notion of scientific revolution in the United Kingdom and the United States. The methodological program, which focuses on revolutionary breakthroughs in scientific ideas, is thus re-evaluated by considering its strategic role in the institutionalisation of the history of science as a discipline. The event that marked the translation of French epistemology into English history of science were the lectures of the delegates from the Soviet Union at the Second International Congress of the History of Science and Technology in 1931. In post-war Anglo-American history of science, the concept of scientific revolution was adopted as a means of excluding Marxist studies of science – which had spread under the influence of the Soviet delegation – from the realm of acceptable discourse. I demonstrate how the Cold War historiography of science introduced a divide between the “internal” and “external” factors of scientific development, and their supposed synthesis in the work of Thomas Kuhn. Finally, I review the critiques that the sociology of scientific knowledge levelled at the story of the Scientific Revolution and point out the importance of these controversies for current epistemological research.
Downloads
References
Alcayna-Stevens, Lys, »Habituating field scientists«, Social Studies of Science, 46 (6/2016), str. 840–851.
Bachelard, Gaston, Oblikovanje znanstvenega duha: prispevek k psihoanalizi objektivnega spoznanja, prev. V. Likar, Ljubljana, Studia humanitatis, 1998.
Canguilhem, Georges, Normalno in patološko, prev. V. Likar, Ljubljana, ŠKUC in Studia humanitatis, 1987.
Canguilhem, Georges, Epistemologija in zgodovina znanosti: izbrani spisi, prev. V. Likar, E. Bahovec in T. Erzar, Ljubljana, Studia humanitatis, 2017.
Baltas, Aristides, Gavroglu, Kostas in Kindi, Vassiliki, »A Discussion with Thomas S. Kuhn«, v Thomas Kuhn, The Road Since Structure: Philosophical Essays 1970–1993, with an Autobiographical Interview, Chicago in London, The University of Chicago Press, 2000, str. 253–324.
Barry, Andrew, »The History of Measurement and the Engineers of Space«, The British Journal for the History of Science, 26 (4/1993), str. 459–468.
Bennett, Jim A. »The Mechanics’ Philosophy and the Mechanical Philosophy«, History of Science, 24 (1/1986), str. 1–28.
Bennett, Jim A., »Geometry and Surveying in Early-seventeenth-century England«, Annals of Science, 48 (1/1991), str. 345–354.
Bernal, John Desmond, The Social Function of Science, London, Routledge, 1939.
Bloor, David, »Anti-Latour«, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 30 (1/1999), str. 81–112.
Bloor, David, »Reply to Bruno Latour«, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 30 (1/1999), str. 131–136.
Boas, Marie, »The Establishment of Mechanical Philosophy«, Osiris, 10 (1952), str. 412–541.
Butterfield, Herbert, The Origins of Modern Science 1300-1800, New York, Macmillan, 1965.
Chilvers, Christopher A. J., »Five Tourniquets and a Ship’s Bell: The Special Session at the 1931 Congress«, Centaurus, 57 (2/2015), str. 61–95.
Chimisso, Cristina, Hélène Metzger, Historian and Historiographer of the Sciences, Routledge, Abingdon, 2019.
Chimisso, Cristina, in Freudenthal, Gad, »A Mind of Her Own: Hélène Metzger to Émile Meyerson, 1933«, Isis, 94 (3/2003), str. 477–491.
Dear, Peter, Revolutionizing the Sciences: European Knowledge in Transition, 1500-1700, London, Red Globe Press, 2019.
Dijksterhuis, Eduard J., The Mechanization of the World Picture, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1961.
Febvre, Lucien, »De l’à peu près à la précision en passant par ouï-dire«, Annales, 5 (1/1950), str. 25–31.
Feyerabend, Paul K., Proti metodi, prev. S. Hozjan, Ljubljana, Studia humanitatis, 1999.
Feyerabend, Paul K., Spoznanje za svobodne ljudi, prev. S. Hozjan, Ljubljana, Krtina, 2007.
Feyerabend, Paul K., Znanost kot umetnost, prev. S. Hozjan. Ljubljana, Založba Sophia, 2008.
Filner, Robert E., »The Social Relations of Science Movement (SRS) and J. B. S. Haldane«, Science & Society, 41 (3/1977), str. 303–316.
Fox, Robert, »Fashioning the Discipline: History of Science in the European Intellectual Tradition«, Minerva, 44 (4/2006), str. 410–432.
Freudenthal, Gad (ur.), Études sur/Studies on Hélène Metzger, Leiden, Brill, 1990.
Freudenthal, Gideon, in McLaughlin, Peter, »Classical Marxist Historiography of Science: The Hessen-Grossmann-Thesis«, v Gideon Freudenthal in Peter McLaughlin (ur.), The Social and Economic Roots of the Scientific Revolution: Texts by Boris Hessen and Henryk Grossmann, Dordrecht, Springer, 2009, str. 1–40.
Galilei, Galileo, Discorsi e dimostrazioni matematiche intorno a due nuove scienze attenenti alla meccanica e i movimenti locali, Leida, Elsevirii, 1638.
Graham, Loren, »The Socio-Political Roots of Boris Hessen: Soviet Marxism and the History of Science«, Social Studies of Science, 15 (4/1985), str. 705–722.
Hall, Rupert A., Ballistics in the Seventeenth Century: A Study in the Relations of Science and War with Reference Principally to England, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1952.
Hall, Rupert A., »Merton Revisited or Science and Society in the Seventeenth Century«, History of Science, 2 (1/1963), str. 1–16.
Hessen, Boris, »The Social and Economic Roots of Newton’s ‘Principia’«, v: N. I. Bukharin et al. (ur.), Science at the Cross Roads: Papers from the Second International Congress of the History of Science and Technology 1931, str. 149–212.
Hozjan, Slavko, »Teorija znanosti kot metateorija«, Anthropos, 19 (5-6/1987), str. 41–58.
Hozjan, Slavko, in Ule, Andrej, »Analitična teorija znanosti kot racionalna rekonstrukcija znanosti in njenih preobrazb«, Vestnik IMŠ, 5 (1-2/1984), str. 61–66.
Jardine, Nicholas, »Whigs and Stories: Herbert Butterfield and the Historiography of Science«, History of Science 41 (2003), str. 125–140.
Koyré, Alexandre, Études galiléennes, Pariz, Hermann, 1939.
Koyré, Alexandre, »Du monde de l’à peu près à l’univers de la précision«, Critique, 4 (28/1948), str. 806–823.
Koyré, Alexandre, Od sklenjenega sveta do neskončnega univerzuma, prev. B. Kante, Ljubljana, ŠKUC, 1988.
Koyré, Alexandre, »Izvori moderne znanosti: nova interpretacija«, prev. V. Likar, v: Alexandre Koyré, Znanstvena revolucija: izbrani spisi iz zgodovine znanstvene in filozofske misli, Ljubljana, Založba ZRC, 2006, str. 51–74.
Koyré, Alexandre, »Galilej in Platon«, prev. V. Vendramin, v: Alexandre Koyré, Znanstvena revolucija: izbrani spisi iz zgodovine znanstvene in filozofske misli, Ljubljana, Založba ZRC, 2006, str. 103–131.
Koyré, Alexandre, »Pomen in vplivnost Newtonove sinteze«, prev. S. Jerele, v: Alexandre Koyré, Znanstvena revolucija: izbrani spisi iz zgodovine znanstvene in filozofske misli, Ljubljana, Založba ZRC, 2006, str. 159–182.
Kuhn, Thomas, »The Function of Measurement in Modern Physical Science«, Isis, 52 (2/1961), str. 161–193.
Kuhn, Thomas, »Preface«, v: Thomas Kuhn, The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, Chicago in London, The University of Chicago Press, 1977, str. ix–xxiii.
Kuhn, Thomas, »Concepts of Cause in the Development of Physics«, v: Thomas Kuhn, The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, Chicago in London, The University of Chicago Press, 1977, str. 21–30.
Kuhn, Thomas, »The History of Science«, v: Thomas Kuhn, The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, Chicago in London, The University of Chicago Press, 1977, str. 105–126.
Kuhn, Thomas, Struktura znanstvenih revolucij, prev. G. Jurman in S. Krek, Ljubljana, Krtina, 1998.
Latour, Bruno, »Give Me a Laboratory and I Will Raise the World«, v: Karin Knorr-Cetina in Michael Mulkay (ur.), Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study of Science, London, Sage, 1983, str. 141–169.
Latour, Bruno, »On Technical Mediation – Philosophy, Sociology, Mediation«, Common knowledge, 3 (2/1994), str. 29–64.
Latour, Bruno, »For David Bloor… and Beyond: A Reply to David Bloor’s ‘Anti-Latour’«, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 30 (1/1999), str. 113–129.
Latour, Bruno, in Woolgar, Steve, Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts (Second Edition), Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1986.
Latour, Bruno, in Bowker, Geof, »A Booming Discipline Short of Discipline: (Social) Studies of Science in France«, Social Studies of Science, 17 (4/1987), str. 715–748.
Lefèvre, Wolfgang, »Galileo Engineer: Art and Modern Science«, Science in Context, 13 (3-4/2000), str. 281–297.
Likar, Vojislav, »Epistemološka analiza procesa znanstvenega spoznavanja pri G. Bachelardu«, Vestnik IMŠ, 1 (2/1980), str. 41–63.
Likar, Vojislav, »Življenje kot epistemološki problem: Canguilhemov pogled na zgodovinsko vlogo in pomen vitalizma«, Vestnik IMŠ, 8 (2/1987), str. 17–23.
Likar, Vojislav, »Epistemologija ali filozofija približka: oblikovanje osnovnih konceptov epistemologije v Bachelardovem zgodnjem opusu«, Vestnik IMŠ, 13 (1/1992), str. 69–80.
Likar, Vojislav, »Od ʻkritike znanosti’ k epistemologiji: O pojmovno zgodovinskem ozadju oblikovanja Bachelardove koncepcije epistemologije«, Filozofski vestnik, 14 (1/1993), str. 101–112.
Lynch, Michael »Discipline and the Material Form of Images: An Analysis of Scientific Visibility«, Social Studies of Science, 15 (1/1985, str. 37–66.
MacKenzie, Donald, »Producing Accounts«, v Massimo Mazzotti (ur.), Knowledge as Social Order: rethinking the sociology of Barry Barnes, Aldershot, Ashgate, 2008, str. 99–117.
Mali, Franc, »Razvoj družbenih študij znanosti in tehnologije«, Teorija in praksa, 50 (2/2013), str. 297–316.
Mayer, Anna-K., »Setting Up a Discipline: Conflicting Agendas of the Cambridge History of Science Committee, 1936–1950«, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 31 (4/2000), str. 665–689.
Mayer, Anna-K., »Setting Up a Discipline, II: British History of Science and ‘The End of Ideology’, 1931–1948«, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 35 (1/2004), str. 41–72.
McGucken, William, Scientists, Society, and State: The Social Relations of Science Movement in Great Britain 1931-1947, Columbus, Ohio State University Press, 1984.
Merton, Robert, »Science, Technology and Society in Seventeenth Century England«, Osiris, 4 (1938), str. 360–632.
Muller, Hermann J., »Observations of Biological Science in Russia«, The Scientific Monthly, 16 (5/1923), str. 539–552.
Newton, Isaac, The Prinicipia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, prev. I. B. Cohen in A. Whitman, Berkley, University of California Press, 1999.
Omodeo, Pietro D., »After Nikolai Bukharin: History of Science and Cultural Hegemony at the Threshold of the Cold War Era«, History of the Human Sciences, 29 (4-5/2016), str. 13–34.
Ophir, Adi, in Shapin, Steven, »The Place of Knowledge: A Methodological Survey«, Science in Context, 4 (1/1991), str. 3–21.
Park, Katharine, in Daston, Lorraine (ur.), The Cambridge History of Science, volume 3: Early Modern Science, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Peña-Guzmán, David M., »French Historical Epistemology: Discourse, Concepts, and the Norms of Rationality«, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 79 (2020), str. 68–76.
Pickering, Andrew (ur.), Science as Practice and Culture, Chicago in London, The University of Chicago Press, 1992.
Pickering, Andrew, The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science, Chicago in London, The University of Chicago Press, 1995.
Porter, Roy, »The Scientific Revolution: A Spoke in the Wheel?«, v R. Porter in M. Teich (ur.), Revolution in History, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1986, str. 290–316.
Renn, Jürgen, in Valleriani, Matteo, »Galileo and the Challenge of the Arsenal«, Nuncius 16 (2001), str. 481–503.
Rheinberger, Hans-Jörg, »On the Historicity of Scientific Knowledge: Ludwik Fleck, Gaston Bachelard, Edmund Husserl«, v D. Hyder, H.-J. Rheinberger (ur.), Science and the Life-World: Essays on Husserl’s Crisis of European Sciences, Stanford, Stanford University Press, 2010, str. 164–176.
Roberts, Lissa, »Agency and Industry: Charles C. Gillispie’s ‘The Natural History of Industry’, Then and Now«, Technology and Culture, 54 (4/2013), str. 922–941.
Schaffer, Simon, »Newton at the Crossroads«, Radical Philosophy, 37 (1984), str. 23–28.
Schaffer, Simon, »The 18th Brumaire of Bruno Latour«, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 22 (1/1991), str. 174–192.
Secord, James A., »Knowledge in Transit«, Isis, 95 (4/2004), str. 654–672.
Shapin, Steven, »The Politics of Observation: Cerebral Anatomy and Social Interests in the Edinburgh Phrenology Disputes«, The Sociological Review Monograph, 27 (1979), str. 139–178.
Shapin, Steven, »Following Scientists Around«, Social Studies of Science, 18 (3/1988), str. 533–550.
Shapin, Steven, »Discipline and Bounding: The History and Sociology of Science as Seen through the Externalism-Internalism Debate«, History of Science, 30 (4/1992), str. 333–369.
Shapin, Steven, The Scientific Revolution, Chicago in London, Chicago University Press, 1996.
Shapin, Steven, in Schaffer, Simon, Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2017.
Ule, Andrej, »Popper med empirizmom in teorijskim holizmom«, Časopis za kritiko znanosti, 22 (166-167/1994), str. 175–184.
Ule, Andrej, »Kuhnov pogled na zgodovino znanosti«, Filozofski vestnik, 16 (1/1995), str. 247–256.
Ule, Andrej, »Popperjeva obramba znanstvenega realizma«, Časopis za kritiko znanosti, 25 (186-187/1997), str. 171–189.
Ule, Andrej, »Kuhnova paradigma in revolucija v teoriji znanosti«, v Thomas Kuhn, Struktura znanstvenih revolucij, prev. G. Jurman in S. Krek, Krtina, Ljubljana, 1998, str. 185–211.
Ule, Andrej, »Kdaj je ‘kopernikanska’ revolucija postala znanstvena revolucija?«, Filozofski vestnik, 26 (1/2005), str. 29–45.
Valilov, Nikolaj I., »The Problem of the Origin of the World’s Agriculture in the Light of the Latest Investigations«, v . I. Bukharin et al. (ur.), Science at the Cross Roads: Papers from the Second International Congress of the History of Science and Technology 1931, Abingdon, Routledge, 2013, str. 97–106
Vesel, Matjaž, »Alexandre Koyré in ʻznanstvena revolucija’«, v: Alexandre Koyré, Znanstvena revolucija, Ljubljana, Založba ZRC, 2006.
Vesel, Matjaž, »Pariška obsodba leta 1277, potentia dei absoluta in rojstvo moderne znanosti«, Filozofski vestnik, 28 (1/2007), str. 19–40.
Vesel, Matjaž, Astronom-filozof: Nikolaj Kopernik, gibanje Zemlje in kopernikanska revolucija, Ljubljana, Založba ZRC, 2007.
Vesel, Matjaž, Kopernikanski manifest Galilea Galileja: geneza Dialoga o dveh glavnih sistemih sveta, Ljubljana, Založba ZRC, 2009.
Vesel, Matjaž, Copernicus: Platonist astronomer-philosopher - cosmic order, the movement of the Earth, and the scientific revolution, Frankfurt, Peter Lang, 2014.
Webster, Charles, The Great Instauration: Science, Medicine, and Reform, 1626-1660, London, Duckworth, 1975.
Werskey, Gary, »On the Reception of Science At The Cross Roads in England«, v: N. I. Bukharin et al. (ur.), Science at the Cross Roads: Papers from the Second International Congress of the History of Science and Technology 1931, Abingdon, Routledge, 2013, str. xi–xxxi.
Werskey, Gary, »The Marxist Critique of Capitalist Science: A History in Three Movements?«, Science as Culture, 16 (4/2007), str. 397–461.
Young, Robert, »Science Is Social Relations«, Radical Science Journal, 5 (1977), str. 65–129.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit their self to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
More in: Submission chapter
