Abstract
AbstractBuilding on my previous writings on presentism, pluralism, and “complementary science”, I develop an activist view of historiography. I begin by recognizing the inevitability of presentism. Our own purposes and perspectives do and should guide the production of our accounts of the past; like funerals, history-writing is for the living. There are different kinds of presentist history, depending on the historians’ purposes and perspectives. My particular inclination is pluralist. Science remembers its own history from a particular perspective (“whiggism”), which views the past as imperfect versions of the present; if professional historians of science shared this perspective, our work would be redundant. Instead, we can make it our task to illuminate the aspects of the past of science that scientists themselves tend to ignore and forget. History of science can also take a more productive role in the creation and improvement of scientific knowledge. Scientific progress as we know it tends to involve the shutting down of alternative paths of inquiry, resulting in a loss of potential and actual knowledge. A critical and sympathetic engagement with the past allows us to recover the lost paths, which can also suggest new paths. These points will be illustrated by a number of examples, especially from the history of chemistry and physics, including the recovery and extension of past experiments.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,General Social Sciences,Philosophy,General Social Sciences,Philosophy
Reference39 articles.
1. Arabatzis, T. (2019). Explaining science historically. Isis, 110, 354–359.
2. Biagioli, M. (1993). Galileo, courtier: The practice of science in the culture of absolutism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3. Butterfield, H. (1931). The Whig interpretation of history. London: G. Bell.
4. Butterfield, H. (1951). History and human relations. London: Collins.
5. Chang, H. (1993). A misunderstood rebellion: The twin-paradox controversy and Herbert Dingle’s vision of science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 24, 741–790.
Cited by
24 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献