Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nMario Wimmern,
Allgemein.
Abstract
Cerebral Protuberances. Towards a History of Intellectual Work. In this paper, I unfold the implications of Warburg's notion of “cerebral protuberance” (German: “Gehirnhirnausstülpung”) for a historical epistemology of intellectual work and material imagination. Attention to the penultimate character of conceptual language, I argue, allows for an analysis of unconscious aspects in the process of knowledge formation. Revisiting Gaston Bachelard's conception of historical epistemology in the age of neuroplasticity, I suggest to attend to the reverberations between history of science and intellectual history in order to arrive at a better understanding of the exteriority of intellectual activity and the importance of affect in scientific and scholarly production.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801915?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
Wiley: Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte: Table of Contents,
Allgemein.
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Volume 41, Issue 4, Page 487-496, December 2018.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201880499?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nHelmuth Trischlern,
Allgemein.
Abstract
Historians of Science and Technology as Time‐eaters. Historians for long mainly focussed on the last couple of millenia. Recently, they have reached out to colonize different temporal worlds. While Deep History seeks to get a better understanding of the development of anatomically modern humans and their culture, Big History integrates cosmological, geological and human temporalities to develop new narratives on the big picture. Hence, historians are time‐eaters. They share their foremost prey, however, with other disciplines such as anthropology and archaeology, paleontology and primatology, linguistics and molecular genetics, with which they collaborate and at the same time compete when reaching out for new temporal concepts such as the Anthropocene. This article understands the both rich and controversial debate on the Anthropocene, the epoch of the humans, as a positive provocation. For historians of science and technology, it offers a welcome opportunity to critically re‐assess their established sets of narratives by interlinking geological and human time‐scales. Newly developed terms such as the “technosphere” and the “technocene” force them to (1) re‐think their concept of technology, (2) better integrate history of technology and environmental history, and (3) replace linear temporalities by layered models of historical change.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801914?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nKristian Köchyn,
Allgemein.
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Volume 41, Issue 4, Page 454-460, December 2018.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801925?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nKlaus Hentscheln,
Allgemein.
Abstract
Loss of the Inner Core: Expectations and Fears for the Future of the History of Science. In this paper, I discuss the current state of history of science in Germany, a combination of strong interest in the field from various neighboring fields (including cultural history, media history, history of art, visual studies) and increasing fragmentation. Powerful institutions such as the Max Planck Institute for History of Science rather encourage this tendency to lose the inner core of the field, a kind of fluidization or vaporization.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801913?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nMonika Wulzn,
Allgemein.
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Volume 41, Issue 4, Page 481-483, December 2018.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801952?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nThomas Machon,
Allgemein.
Abstract
Translational History of Science: On Networks, Failed Trials and Thought Experiments. Starting with the question, why it could be difficult to write a history of history of science, the paper summarizes problems and risks of traditional concepts of interdisciplinarity. The essay postulates different modes of transgressive thinking and focuses on future topics of history of science, e.g. early networks of scientists, missed encounters, case studies of errors and failed experiments or methods of thought experiments.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801948?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nTheodore Arabatzisn,
Allgemein.
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Volume 41, Issue 4, Page 473-474, December 2018.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801944?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nHeike Webern,
Allgemein.
Abstract
Fields for Innovative Future Research in History of Science – A Historian of Technology's Perspective. The observations at hand present a historian of technology's perspective and sketch three fields for innovative future research: (past) ‘futures’ and future scenarios in themselves; the challenges as imposed by recent developments in science, technology, and society (e.g. digitization, climate change); and the twisting and flipping of established perspectives (e.g. by focusing on ‘failed’ or ‘old’ science and technology and their declension). Moreover, historians of science, technology, and medicine should participate in emerging transdisciplinary fields such as Environmental Humanities.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801946?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nAxel Volmarn,
Allgemein.
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Volume 41, Issue 4, Page 477-479, December 2018.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801940?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen