Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nChristopher Möllmannn,
Allgemein.
Abstract
A Plea for Contrapuntal Work of Reflection in a Niche. This essay traces a still highly influential little ‘Sattelzeit’ in the historiography of science and humanities that occurred more than two decades ago. It expounds some of the problems that have been arising from the disciplinary diffusion of scientific‐historical research agendas and the boom of a history of knowledge. It is sceptical of new forms of positivism and argues amongst other things for more critical genealogies of contemporary discursive hegemonies, in‐depth studies of the fluctuating cultural authority of modern science, and a new reflection on the specific traits of a genuinely scientific‐historical imagination.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801933?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nManfred Kaysern,
Allgemein.
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Volume 41, Issue 4, Page 453-453, December 2018.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801949?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nFriedrich Steinlen,
Allgemein.
Abstract
Knowledge and the History of Science. This essay asks how the object of history of knowledge could be delineated so as to keep it distinct from the history of science (that has always dealt with knowledge) and, at the same time, to keep it specific enough not to turn into a general history of all human activities. By way of discussing the type of knowledge we could call ‘scientific’, and arguing that history of science should take an integrative approach, I propose that a history of knowledge should focus on generalizing accounts taken in most various domains and cultures.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801937?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nCarolin Piotrowskin,
Allgemein.
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Volume 41, Issue 4, Page 479-481, December 2018.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801939?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nCornelius Borckn,
Allgemein.
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Volume 41, Issue 4, Page 325-328, December 2018.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801950?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nMonika Dommannn,
Allgemein.
Abstract
And at the End They Took Care of the Science Museum… This is the story of history of science, and why in the twenty‐first century it ended up curating the legacy of science, as we knew it. Once upon a time, history of science lived quietly and studious next to the Natural and the Medical Sciences and their wax models, their herbaria, the geological collections, and all the scientific instruments that once had been modern. Suddenly, around 1980, new interests in Philosophy, Sociology and Cultural Studies arose. Provocative research questions as for example the history of rationality, the history of the subaltern technicians in the laboratory, and the ontology and epistemology of the hybrids between nature and culture inspired the intellectual discussions. Although the field flourished, received an abundance of funding and could even build up its own research institutes, after the Millennium, its very existence became gradually jeopardized. Science as we knew it since the Enlightenment lost grounds. The New Economy and not the state anymore provided the funding for research. History of science didn't succeed to survive as expert for data, blind spots, fakes, misinformation, lies, conspiracy theories, and historical thinking in times of scientific accelerations. It began with the loss of reputation, followed by the loss of the job. At the end, history of science lived, not unhappily, ever after as curators of the legacy of Science as we knew it.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801941?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nClaude Debrun,
Allgemein.
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Volume 41, Issue 4, Page 461-467, December 2018.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801947?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nHeiner Fangeraun,
Allgemein.
Abstract
Future for the History of Science? An Interjection Oriented towards Science Policies Inspired by the History of Medicine. The author argues that diversity is the great strength of the history of science. It allows for flexible reactions to intellectual challenges posed by its various reference disciplines. This strength, however, might turn into a weakness, if diversity results in arbitrariness. These claims are illustrated by the example of the history of medicine as a sub‐discipline of the history of science: The history of medicine is currently able to acquire project funding because it is diverse and flexible. Simultaneously, it experiences the risks of flexibility and third‐party funding. Basic funding, scholarly interaction, and organized exchange seem necessary to ensure professional standards. It is concluded that the future for the history of science is bright, if it is able to preserve both its diverse creativity and a disciplinary sense for academic standards.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801931?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nNicole C. Karafyllisn,
Allgemein.
Abstract
Philosophy needs History of Science needs History of Philosophy. The purpose of this essay is to identify why history of science and philosophy of science have lost their former alliance. Reasons include, among others, structural elements in funding, e.g. a run‐down version of interdisciplinarity that encourages philosophy and history to work with the sciences rather than with each other. Moreover, the disciplinary assemblage in terms of cultural studies (German: Kulturwissenschaften) has eroded the continental concept of ‘Geisteswissenschaft’ to which history and philosophy traditionally belong. In consequence, both disciplines face a loss of knowledge in historical terminologies and related inquiries. Above all, these matter for shaping and understanding concepts and ideas; not last for the conceptualization of history and philosophy of science themselves.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801919?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen
Dezember 7, 2018, 2:50 p.m.,
nPhilipp Ostenn,
Allgemein.
Abstract
The Facts in the Case of Science. The article casts an eye on the role of scientific facts in relation to the circumstances, under which they emerge, and discusses the challenges for a history of science in a near future. The author assumes that science, the economy, ideologies, and religious belief will keep influencing each other. He recommends an open mind for new sources and pleads for interdisciplinary approaches.
Quelle: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bewi.201801936?af=R
Kommentare geschlossen