Science and Its History: A Reassessment of the Historiography of Science

Contents......Page 10
Abstract......Page 8
Foreword......Page 13
Preface......Page 17
Acknowledgments......Page 20
Preface......Page 21
Acknowledgements......Page 23
Introductory Note: On Studies and Their Motivations......Page 24
First Preliminary Essay: On the Desirable Standard of Publication......Page 30
Second Preliminary Essay: On the Desirable Standard of Criticism......Page 52
Third Preliminary Essay: On the Desirable Standard of Popular Science......Page 75
Fourth Preliminary Essay: On the Merit of Flogging Dead Horses......Page 110
Concluding Preliminary Essay: On the Sifting of the Grain from the Chaff......Page 136
Introductory Note......Page 138
Corrections......Page 139
1. The Inductivist Philosophy Paints Ideas and Even Thinkers as Black or White; Its Criterion for Whiteness is the Up-to-Date Science Textbook......Page 144
2. The Function of Inductive Histories of Science is Largely Ritualistic, a Kind of Ancestor-Worship......Page 147
3. The Standard Problems of The Inductivist Historian largely Concern Questions of Whom to Worship and for What Reason......Page 150
4. History of Science – as It Is and as It Ought to Be. For the Inductivist, These are Embarrassingly Different......Page 154
5. The Inductivist Technique, However, is to Ignore this Problem and to Transcribe Ever Increasing Numbers of Historical Details; this Leaves Little Time for Thinking Critically......Page 157
6. Ampère's Discovery is a Case that may be Studied Fruitfully with the use of Historical Material that Should Neither be Transcribed as it Stands nor Ignored......Page 162
7. The Broad Outline of the History of Science is the History of Scientific Schools of Thought and Their Controversies; the Inductivist must Ignore Schools and Controversies; He is thus Left with Some Version of Marxist Economism as the Only Tool for Studying the Broad Outline......Page 165
8. The Rise of the Conventionalist Philosophy was Largely due to Revolt Against Inductivism and its Black-and-White Categorizing......Page 169
9. The Continuity Theory and the Emergence Technique were Invented by Duhem as a Traditionalist Conservative Alternative to Inductivist Radicalism......Page 172
10. The Cancerous Growth of Continuity into a Multitude of Variations on Duhem's Theme is Irrational......Page 174
11. The Comparative Method of the Conventionalist Applies a Criterion of Relative Rather than of Absolute Merit; It is the First Systematic Historical Method to Appear in the Field of History of Science; but the Comparative Method, Though Adequate to a Degree, has a Limited Application......Page 181
12. Priestley's Dissent from the French School of Chemistry is Historically Important, Yet it does not Fit the Conventionalist Framework Because Conventionalism too Leaves Little Room for Controversy......Page 185
13. The Advantage of Avoiding being Wise after the Event is that This Allows us to See the World with the Eyes of Those Who Participated in the Event, and Thus to Explain It......Page 188
14. The Difficulty of Avoiding being Wise After the Event Arises from Having Suppressed the Reasonable Errors that the Event has Corrected......Page 191
15. The Obstacles on the Way to a New Idea are Accepted Reasonable Errors that Contradict it......Page 194
16. The Obstacles on the Way to a New Factual Discovery are the Same......Page 199
17. Ørsted's Discovery was Difficult to Make Because It Conflicted with Newton's Theory of Force......Page 205
18. Historical Explanation of Any Value is Rare in the Annals of the History of Science, Mainly Because of a Naive Acceptance of Untenable Philosophical Principles......Page 212
Notes......Page 216
III. Historiographic essays......Page 262
1. A Retrospect......Page 263
2. The Place of Metaphysics in the Historiography of Science......Page 272
3. Rationality: Philosophical, Social, and Historical Aspects......Page 284
Notes......Page 300
4. Between the Philosophy and the History of Science......Page 303
5. Scientific Disagreement......Page 313
6. Kuhn's Way......Page 324
IV. Historical Essays......Page 353
1. Who Needs Aristotle?......Page 354
Notes......Page 364
2. The Desire for Reason and the Rise of Modern Science: The Role of Maimonides......Page 365
3. The Riddle of Bacon......Page 380
4. Who Discovered Boyle's law?......Page 406
Notes......Page 457
5. Theoretical Bias in Evidence: A Historical Sketch......Page 462
6. Field Theory in De la Rive's Treatise on Electricity......Page 477
7. Anthropomorphism in Science......Page 493
8. Newtonianism Before and After the Einstenian Revolution......Page 499
Notes and References......Page 514
B......Page 518
D......Page 520
F......Page 521
G......Page 522
H......Page 523
K......Page 524
L......Page 525
M......Page 526
P......Page 527
R......Page 528
S......Page 529
V......Page 530
Z......Page 531