History of science for its own sake?
Fuller, Steve, 1959-. (2010) History of science for its own sake? History of the Human Sciences, Vol.23 (No.4). pp. 95-99. ISSN 0952-6951
WRAP_Fuiller_9970067-so-020811-response_to_erickson.pdf - Accepted Version - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0952695110372024
I see two major themes arising from Mark Erickson’s (2010) provocative question, ‘Why should I read histories of science?’ The first pertains to the apparent failure of historians to address ‘why’ the history has taken the course it has. Although Erickson singles out histories written by professional scientists, it is a question that is also fairly asked of professional historians, who remain sufficiently turned against positivism to prefer micro-contextualisations of the past. The second theme concerns the audience for histories of science. Here I am much less happy than Erickson with Shapin’s (2005) characterisation of how historical writing about science would need to change in order to acquire a wider audience.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Divisions:||Faculty of Social Sciences > Sociology|
|Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):||Science -- Historiography|
|Journal or Publication Title:||History of the Human Sciences|
|Publisher:||Sage Publications Ltd.|
|Official Date:||October 2010|
|Number of Pages:||5|
|Page Range:||pp. 95-99|
|Access rights to Published version:||Restricted or Subscription Access|
Agassi, J. (1963). Towards an historiography of science. The Hague: Mouton
Actions (login required)