- SteLar (There are too many Steve's in the World and on this Reflector.)
----------
From: David Stump
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 1996 11:36 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list HOPOS-L
Subject: summary: critical historical accounts
I have some information about historical critical accounts of
science. These works clearly fall into the category of popular
or semi-popular works written by scientists in order to influence
some kind of political or social debate, an area the Rachel Laudan
has been studying intensely (I attended her NEH seminar on the
topic). This is only a start, but thanks to all who replied. More
information is welcome.
David Stump
stumpd@usfca.edu
Ernie Hamm suggests a good source of information on the term,
but I have not checked it yet:
Frei, Hans W. _The eclipse of Biblical narrative; a study in
eighteenth and nineteenth century hermeneutics_ New Haven,
Yale University Press, 1974.
John Preston noted that Steve Fuller has written on this
topic; I have posted Steve's helpful note below.
I was interested in Bonola's use of the term in
Bonola, Roberto (1912, 1955). Non-Euclidean Geometry: A Critical and
Historical Study of its Development. H. S. Carslaw, transl.
New York: Dover. (original Italian, 1906)
Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 18:48:11 +0100 (BST)
From: Steve Fuller <Steve.Fuller@durham.ac.uk>
To: David Stump <STUMPD@ALM.ADMIN.USFCA.EDU>
Subject: Re: critical historical accounts of science
Dear David,
The aspect of critical-historical theology that's relevant to Mach is its
scholarly demystification of the Christian salvation story, especially the
works written by D.F. Strauss and the other young Hegelians that Marx
writes about in The German Ideology. I briefly talk about how this applies
to the philosophy of science, in connection with Mach's debates with
Planck on the future of science, in 'Retrieving the point of the
Realism-Instrumentalism Debate: Mach v. Planck on Science Education
Policy', PSA 1994, vol 1, pp. 200-207. You'll see why I'm interested in
this at the end of the article.
I also show how recent social constructivists are in this
critical-historical mold as well in 'On The motives of the new sociology of
science', History of the Human Sciences 8 (1995), 117-124.
Also, my inaugural address at Durham explores this a bit. See
http://www.dur.ac.uk/~dss0www/dept/staffsf.htm
One article I found useful for exploring the connection between
critical-historical theology and radical approaches to science is
Frederick Gregory, 'Theologians, science, and theories of truth in the
nineteenth century'. In M.J. Nye et al. (eds) -The Invention of Physical
Science_ (Kluwer, 1992), pp. 81-96.
A good epistemological critique of critical-historical approaches (which
links the theologians with Dilthey and other late 19th century secular
historicists) comes from an early work of F.H. Bradley's: _The
presuppositions of critical history_ (Quadrangle, 1968). This book is
supposed to provide the link between Bradley and Collingwood's
philosophy of history.
I was a little surprised to see that Dampier uses 'critical-historical' to
characterize his work, since my impression was that the expression only
had resonance (among historians of science) for people who were tuned into
the German scientific scene at the turn of the century, and worried -- as
Mach was -- that Physics was turning into the new Catholic Church.
The 'critical-historical' stuff is something that both Popper and
especially Feyerabend claimed as the basis of their intellectual
continuity with Mach. Feyerabend is most explicit about this in _Science
and the Free Society_.
yours
Steve
- SteLar (There are too many Steve's in the World and on this Reflector.)