Rezension: Der Protest der Physiker. Die “Göttinger Erklärung” von 1957 von Robert Lorenz
Quelle: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/resolve/doi?DOI=10.1002%2Fbewi.201201566
Archiv für Juni 2012
Geschichte ohne Kausalität. Abgrenzungsstrategien gegen die Wissenschaftssoziologie in zeitgenössischen Ansätzen historischer Epistemologie
History Without Causality. How Contemporary Historical Epistemology Demarcates Itself From the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge. Contemporary proponents of historical epistemology often try to delimit their enterprise by demarcating it from the sociology of scientific knowledge and other sociologically oriented approaches in the history of science. Their criticism is directed against the use of causal explanations which are deemed to invite reductionism and lead to a totalizing perspective on science. In the present article I want to analyse this line of criticism in what I consider are two paradigmatic works of contemporary historical epistemology: Lorraine Daston’s und Peter Galison’s Objectivity and Hans-Jörg Rheinberger’s Toward a History of Epistemic Things. I first present their arguments against the sociological and causal analysis of scientific knowledge and practice and then try to defend sociological work in the history of science against their charges. I will, however, not do so by defending causal explanations directly. Rather, I will show that the arguments against sociological analysis put forward in contemporary historical epistemology, as well as historical epistemology’s own models of historical explanation and narration, bear problematic consequences. I argue that Daston, Galison and Rheinberger fail to create productive resonances between macro- and microhistorical perspectives, that they reproduce an internalist picture of scientific knowledge, and finally that Rheinberger’s attempt to deconstruct the dichotomy between subject and object leads him to neglect questions about the political dimension of scientific research.
Rezension: Die Fixierung des modernen Wissenschaftsideals durch Laplace von Jörn Henrich
Quelle: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/resolve/doi?DOI=10.1002%2Fbewi.201201573
Vom Nutzen des Augenblicks für die Projekte der Wissenschaft
Using the Instant for the Projects of Science. Focusing on Bachelard’s books L’Intuition de l’instant (1932) and La dialectique de la durée (1936), the paper deals with Bachelard’s discontinuous and serial concept of time that is formulated against Henri Bergson’s concept of duration. With a view to the philosophical concept of monadology, to the theory of relativity, and to the contemporary psychological and neurological research, the paper points to the significance of the instant for Bachelard’s concept of temporality, for his desubjectified concept of the individual as well as his discontinuous concept of matter. Moreoever, the paper explores the discontinuous conception of temporality in Bachelard’s epistemological writings. The paper argues that Bachelard’s discontinuous concept of the specific temporality of science is based on a fundamental discontinuity of reality of both physical as well as psychological processes.
Rezension: Die Text-Kunstkammer. Populäre Wissenssammlungen des Barock am Beispiel der ‘Relationes Curiosae’ von Flemming Schock
Quelle: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/resolve/doi?DOI=10.1002%2Fbewi.201201574
“Wachstum” oder “Revolution”? Ernst Cassirer und die Wissenschaftsgeschichte
“Growth” or “Revolution”? Ernst Cassirer and History of Science. Ernst Cassirer’s contributions to history of science have been long time neglected. The aim of this paper is to show the historical and philosophical framework of Cassirer’s engagement in this field, starting from his seminal work about the problem of knowledge in science and philosophy of the modern age. Moreover the author suggests that Cassirer’s late studies about Galilei and the origins of mathematical science are of some interest in order to comprehend both his commitment to contemporary history of science (from Burtt to Koyré) and his intellectual heritage for our agendas in a post-Kuhnian era.
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte 2/2012
Quelle: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/resolve/doi?DOI=10.1002%2Fbewi.201290001
Science and the History of the Sciences. Conceptual Innovations Through Historicizing Science in the Eighteenth Century
Wissenschaft und die Geschichte der Wissenschaften. Begriffliche Innovationen im Zuge der Historisierung der Wissenschaften im 18. Jahrhundert. Die historische Rekonstruktion der Wissenschaften ist auf vielfältige Weise mit philosophischen Diskussionen des 18. Jahrhunderts verknüpft. Insbesondere teilen die Philosophiegeschichtsschreibung und die Historiographie der Wissenschaften das konzeptuelle Problem, eine Vielzahl wissenschaftlicher bzw. philosophischer Praktiken unter einem gemeinsamen Oberbegriff zu versammeln. Die historische Analyse der Entwicklung der Wissenschaften bietet hierzu einen Zugang, in dem die Definition von “Wissenschaft” bzw. “Wissenschaften” ebenso zur Diskussion steht wie die Systematisierung der Wissenschaften. In einer Analyse dieses begrifflichen Problems und einer Typologisierung wissenschaftshistorischer Ansätze des 18. Jahrhunderts wird die enge Interaktion philosophischer und wissenschaftshistorischer bzw. – allgemeiner – wissenschaftsreflexiver Diskurse im 18. Jahrhundert aufgezeigt.Science and the History of the Sciences. Conceptual Innovations Through Historicizing Science in the Eighteenth Century. The historical reconstruction of science is linked to philosophical discussions of the eighteenth century in many ways. The historiography of philosophy and the historiography of science share the conceptual problem to assemble the multitude of scientific and philosophical practices under general concepts. The historical analysis of scientific progress offers a clue by problematizing definitions of “science” and “sciences” as well as the system of sciences as a whole. By analyzing these conceptual problems and the typology of historical enterprises of the eighteenth century, this paper will discuss the close interrelations which existed between philosophical and historical discourses of eighteenth-century reflection on science.
Rezension: Die Form des Werdens. Eine Kulturgeschichte der Embryologie, 1760–1830 von Janina Wellmann
Quelle: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/resolve/doi?DOI=10.1002%2Fbewi.201201575
Wissenschaftsgeschichte und Wissenschaftsphilosophie – Einführende Bemerkungen
History of Science and Philosophy of Science. Introductory Remarks. This article introduces two special issues of the journal History of Science Reports (Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte) with contributions on the relationships of history and philosophy of science since the seventeenth century. The introduction begins with a brief reminder of Thomas Kuhn’s provocative discussion of the relationship in the 1970s, placing it in the context of the debate of the period over whether the foundation of university departments for History and Philosophy of Science in the United States had led to a mere “marriage of convenience” or something more. Following this the paper briefly outlines the transformative impact of the “practical turn” in both philosophy and history of science since the 1990s, and contends that the relationship of history and philosophy of science has nonetheless become increasingly distant over time. This is due in large part to the professionalisation of history of science and to the recent turn to cultural approaches in that field; both trends have led to the adoption of strictly historicist rather than analytical perspectives on knowledge. General historians, too, are paying more attention to the increasing impact of science and technology, but have at most instrumental use for philosophical perspectives. Thus, the distinct possibility arises that the debate between historical and analytical approaches in philosophy of science is becoming a conversation within one discipline rather than a dialogue between two disciplines: what was once a „marriage of convenience” could end in respectful separation or amicable divorce. The article concludes with brief summaries of the articles published in the two special issues, indicating their relations to specific aspects of the broader topic at hand.