Historiography of Not-So-Recent Science:

摘要: With most categories now apparently contestable in professional historiography, historians of science (so-called) surely feel especially vulnerable - not least those concerned with periods prior to the nineteenth century. If 'early modern' dangerously implies teleology, 'modern' a terminus from which only exit seems be postmodern;1 all such labels invite accusations progressivist historicism and, for acutely trained historian science, latent whiggishness (for we are postmodernists now). One could always obviate difficulty term by ditching talk history altogether (its origins lying an opposition 'ancient' history, after all), and speaking instead 'recent' history; conventional antecedent might called "not-so-recent history". But pragmatically speaking, there no great conceptual problem lurking behind this particular issue terminology. Where one chooses place demarcation between differentiated is another question, course. The present article takes look at some recent work on period C.1500-C.1700, that is, late Scientific Revolution. It significance cannot claim even remotely comprehensive; I focus few issues seem worthy especial note.SCIENCE ETC.An additional burden pre-nineteenth-century nowadays concerns 'science' itself: specialist increasingly agreed as know it endeavour born century.2 Disagreement remains rife, however, about whether general may legitimately used earlier or, indeed, other cultural regions than European. Latin word scientia its cognates had specific meanings, once extensive restricted, usages derived academic, scholastic sources. To extent wish confine ourselves activity recognized our historical actors, would behoove us take corresponding (and shifting) boundaries way definitive subject matter. Thus, "not-so-recent" period, follows conventionally meaningless 'medieval' ("older"?) itself fields necessary demonstration their conclusions, well areas controversy over scientific status took place. Yet scholars regret necessity therefore including within 'history science' subjects, law or theology, were often themselves regarded scientiae.The usual solution has long been put actor's category side favour focusing attention topical study correspond, more less, present-day attention. approach calls selective activities past coherence provided present, thus run grave risk 'present-centredness' , expansive version whiggishness.3 danger here lies imposing systematic distortion heedlessly understanding having carried out under present. Nonetheless, effective recommendation do just this, using rubric 'protoscience', recently forward Pamela Smith.4 Smith uses 'protoscience' designate "studies trace early modern development objects, practices, theories, what call protosciences astronomy physics". Her idea avoid implication histories "take objects fixed" upon ways thinking practice have come constitute contemporary sciences. …