Table Of ContentPositioning the History of Science
BOSTON STUDIES IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Editors
ROBERT S. COHEN, Boston University
JÜRGEN RENN, Max Planck Institute for the History of Science
KOSTAS GAVROGLU, University of Athens
Editorial Advisory Board
THOMAS F. GLICK, Boston University
ADOLF GRÜNBAUM, University of Pittsburgh
SYLVAN S. SCHWEBER, Brandeis University
JOHN J. STACHEL, Boston University
MARX W. WARTOFSKY†, (Editor 1960–1997)
VOLUME 248
POSITIONING THE
HISTORY OF SCIENCE
Edited by
Kostas Gavroglu,
UniversityofAthens,
Greece
and
Jürgen Renn
MaxPlanckInstitutefortheHistoryofScience,
Germany
AC.I.P.CataloguerecordforthisbookisavailablefromtheLibraryofCongress.
ISBN-101-4020-5419-X(HB)
ISBN-101-4020-5420-3(e-book)
ISBN-13978-1-4020-5419-8(HB)
ISBN-13978-1-4020-5420-4(e-book)
PublishedbySpringer,
P.O.Box17,3300AADordrecht,TheNetherlands.
www.springer.com
Printedonacid-freepaper
AllRightsReserved
©2007Springer
Nopartofthisworkmaybereproduced,storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmitted
inanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,microfilming,
recordingorotherwise,withoutwrittenpermissionfromthePublisher,withtheexceptionnl
ofanymaterialsuppliedspecificallyforthepurposeofbeingenteredandexecuted
onacomputersystem,forexclusiveusebythepurchaserofthework.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Positioning the History of Science
Kostas Gavroglu and Jürgen Renn 1
Big History?
Babak Ashrafi 7
Suggestions for the Study of Science
Stephen G. Brush 13
Will Einstein Still be the Super-Hero of Physics History in 2050?
Tian Yu Cao 27
For a History of Knowledge
Olivier Darrigol 33
Working in Parallel, Working Together
Lorraine Daston 35
Challenges in Writing About Twentieth Century East Asian Physicists
Dong-Won Kim (Jhu) 39
Why Should Scientists Become Historians?
Raphael Falk and Ruma Falk 43
From the Social to the Moral to the Spiritual: The Postmodern Exaltation
of the History of Science
Paul Forman 49
Between Science and History
Evelyn Fox Keller 57
The Search for Autonomy in History of Science
Yves Gingras 61
Without Parallels?: Averting a Schweberian Dystopia
Michael D. Gordin 65
The Intellectual Strengths of Pluralism and Diversity
Loren Graham 69
On Connoisseurship
John L. Heilbron 73
v
vi TableofContents
Concerning Energy
Steve Joshua Heims 77
Reflections on a Discipline
Erwin N. Hiebert 87
The Woman in Einstein’s Shadow
Gerald Holton 95
The Mutual Embrace: Institutions and Epistemology
David Kaiser 99
History, Science, and History of Science
Helge Kragh 105
Parallel Lives and The History of Science
Mary Jo Nye 109
Discarding Dichotomies, Creating Community:
Sam Schweber and Darwin Studies
Diane B. Paul and John Beatty 113
Public Participation and Industrial Technoscience Today:
The difficult question of accountability
Dominique Pestre 119
The Character of Truth
Joan Richards 135
Schweber, Physicist, Historian and Moral Example
José M. Sánchez-Ron 139
What’s New in Science?
Terry Shinn 143
On the Road
Skúli Sigurdsson 149
Plutarchian Versus Socratic Scientific Biography
Thomas Söderqvist 159
Problems Not Disciplines
John Stachel 163
Physicist-Historians
Roger H. Stuewer 169
Letting the Scientists Back In
Stephen J. Weininger 173
TableofContents vii
Science As History
M. Norton Wise 177
Postscript
Sam Schweber 185
KOSTAS GAVROGLU AND JÜRGEN RENN
POSITIONING THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE
The present volume, compiled in honor of an outstanding historian of science,
physicist and exceptional human being, Sam Schweber, is unique in assembling
a broad spectrum of positions on the history of science by some of its leading
representatives. Readers will find it illuminating to learn how prominent authors
judgethecurrentstatusandthefutureperspectivesoftheirfield.Studentswillfind
thisvolumehelpfulasaguideinafragmentedfieldthatcontinuestobedominated
by idiosyncratic expertise and still lacks a methodical canon. The essays were
writteninresponsetoourinvitationtoexplicatetheviewsoftheauthorsconcerning
the state of the history of science today and the issues we felt are related to its
future. Although not all of the scholars whom we asked to write have contributed
an essay, this volume can nevertheless be considered as a rather comprehensive
survey of the present state of the history of science. All of the papers collected
here reflect in one way or another the strong influence Sam Schweber has exerted
duringthepastdecadesinhisgentlewayonthehistoryofscienceaswellasonthe
lives of many of its protagonists worldwide. All who have had the opportunity of
encounteringhimhavebenefitedfromhisadvice,benevolenceandfriendship.Sam
Schweber’s intellectual taste, his passion for knowledge and his erudition are all
encompassing. It therefore seemed fitting to honor him with a collection of essays
of comparable breadth; nothing less would suffice.
The history of science, like any other established academic discipline, is subject
to tensions that are well reflected in the papers presented here. Whether these
functionasadrivingforceforitsfuturedevelopmentorrisktearingitasundermay
bejudgeddifferentlybydifferentreaders,andwillinanycaseremainatopictobe
debatedamonghistoriansofscience.Principalamongthesetensionsisthatbetween
historyandscience.Bothscientistandhistorian,SamSchweberhasexperiencedthis
tension,evenembodieditandhasshownusthroughhislife’sworkhowtoresolve
it in a productive way. This tension, so essential for anyone entering the history
ofscience,whichencompassesdifferentinterests,culturalvalues,historiographical
perspectives and methods, is touched upon in many of the essays. Another tension
is that between the focus on content and on context, responsible for much of the
acrimonypresentlyprevailinginourfield.Shouldahistorianofscienceconcentrate
on what makes science a human enterprise, that is pomp, power, passion and
circumstance,orratheronwhatmakesscienceuniqueamongallhumanenterprises,
that is, its historically situated quest for knowledge? Once again, in his work, Sam
has shown ways to successfully transform this tension into a medium of deep
K.GavrogluandJ.Renn(eds.),PositioningtheHistoryofScience,1–5.
©2007Springer.
2 KostasGavrogluandJürgenRenn
historical insights. Yet, that tension is still with us and continues to shape current
intellectual debates and institutional struggles. No wonder then that the issues
surrounding this particular tension are a prevailing topic of many of the papers
included in this volume. Other tensions are perhaps less prominent but no less
vital, for instance that between collaborative ventures in the history of science and
individualintellectualpursuitsorbetweenamoremethodologically-orientedhistory
of science and an approach governed by personal taste and connoisseurship, or
thatbetweenahistoryofsciencefocusedontheEuropeanandAmericantraditions
and a global history of knowledge covering also non-European traditions. These
tensions as well as several others are also reflected in the views of the authors.
The essays in this volume address some of the major questions presently
concerning the community of historians of science, such as the question as to how
sciencehasgonethroughdramatictransformationsinrecentdecadesandwhatthis
change means for doing history, or the question of how history of science as an
interdisciplinarydisciplinehaschanged.Forinstance,havesomeofthethemesthat
weresoprominentintheresearchagendasofhistoriansofscienceintherelatively
recent past actually become themes without a future? What has been the outcome
forhistoriansofscienceofmorethantwodecadesofhistoriographicalcontroversies
with, at times, strong philosophical and ideological contentions? What possible
syntheses are we envisaging for the not so distant future? And, most importantly,
towhatextenthavetherangeandcontentofquestionstobeexaminedwithin,say,
the coming decade, been re-defined by these controversies?
Historians of science were always very sensitive and aware of the changes
happening in science and the essays in this volume reflect this awareness. Some
of them explicitly address the question of whether we are facing the emergence of
a new paradigm of science. Several ways of characterizing such a new paradigm
are being explored: the end of reductionism, the expanding role of techno-science
and industrialized science comprising a tendency towards the privatization and
commercialization of knowledge, the changing role of the sciences in the structure
of universities, but also the emergence of a new epistemology of processes of
learning and evaluation and the increasing role of historical explanations in the
natural sciences.
Naturally, the changes in science mentioned above constitute major challenges
forthehistoryofsciencedemandingnewwaysofdealingwithitshistoricalobjects.
Even the sheer smallness of the number of historians of science when set into
relation to the vastness of scientific activities represents such a challenge. Also,
in an age of industrialized science, moral reflections as they have been part of
some of the best scholarly work in the history of science including that of Sam
Schweber, can no longer be causes championed by individual scientists, whatever
their prestige. Whole communities of scientists are obliged to become aware of
the wider consequences of their work and of the very character of what it is they
are producing. At the same time, this need for awareness represents an important
challenge for the community of historians of science, and can be addressed only
