BRIEF HISTORY OF SCIENCE (original) (raw)
Related papers
This is a general paper dealing with the history of the history of science, with a special focus on historians and epistemologists who bolster their historiographic approach by making reference and/or relying on science, e.g. Popper, Bachelard, and Canguilhem
THE GENESIS OF SCIENCE AND ITS EVOLUTION THROUGHOUT HISTORY
This article aims to present the genesis of science and its evolution from Antiquity to the contemporary era. Philosophers of science and scientists consider ancient investigations of nature to be pre-scientific. Even without the use of the scientific method inaugurated by Galileo Galilei in the Middle Ages, investigations of nature prior to this period, considered pre-scientific, contributed enormously to the advancement of science.
1996
Abstract Science is arguably the most revolutionary social activity known to us. It has transformed us and our environment in ways unimaginable three thousand years ago. If we are healthier, wealthier and wiser (but maybe not happier?) than our forefathers, it is largely due to modern science. Unfortunately, not many of us stop to reflect on how this unique social activity originated. In this essay in two parts, I hope to offer an account that is representative rather than comprehensive or definitive.
Introduction: History of Science and Philosophy of Science
Perspectives on Science, 2002
The four papers and the comment that make up the bulk of this issue of Perspectives on Science, originated in a session organized by Friedrich Steinle for a meeting of the History of Science Society in Denver in 2001. We were struck by the extent to which, in spite of their differences, each of the papers managed to surmount some of the obstacles that beset the delicate, and sometimes difªcult, relationship between history of science and philosophy of science. The authors have reworked their papers to highlight the intimate interactions in their work between detailed history of science and some core issue(s) in philosophy of science. The papers deal with different historical episodes and the authors speak from distinctively divergent viewpoints, but each of them develops speciªc ways of intertwining historical and philosophical work in ways that improve both the historical studies and the philosophical analysis. This is an accomplishment of no small importance. Attempts to bring historical and philosophical studies of science into close contact with one another have a relatively long history. During an important formative period for the philosophy of science in the nineteenth century, many authors, perhaps most notably William Whewell, sought to base general accounts of science on serious studies of its history (see The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, Founded upon their History, 1840). Although the history and the philosophy of science have often proceeded in considerable independence of one another, ever since Whewell's groundbreaking work there have been notable attempts to provide a historical footing for general philosophies of science. One need only think of Duhem or Mach or, since the 1960s, Hacking, Kuhn, Lakatos, Latour, and Laudan-and many more. Recently, however, mainstream history of science and mainstream philosophy of science have gone in different directions. History of science
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
Philosophical Aspects of the History of Science
The presented text focuses rather on enabling access to philosophical aspects and ideological residuals found in several scientific approaches and issues. It means, analyses of conceptual schemes but also of phenomena present in their implicitly perceived background are to be dealt with. It is essays on science, its roots, and essence but also on relations of science and philosophy and also on heritage which philosophers left in science that I thematize. And it is in this sense that the presented text represents a textbook. It should try to teach how to comprehend explanatory bases and limits of philosophical and scientific knowledge but also to view things creatively, in other than a traditional way. Its task is to make bases complicated and surmise boundaries, and also to find creatively inspirations and new possible outcomes. The text is a philosophical essay (in the original sense of this word: an examination, (re)consideration, experiment). It is an attempt to ponder on a nature of sciences, methods and procedures, evidences and also on axioms and explanatory bases, but at the same time it represents an attempt to assess them. From this viewpoint, it rather complicates issues than provides answers to them and that is what the author’s intention aspires to: to induce students not to take things for granted and to try to view the world differently from the way they perceived it before. A vision of the world, clarity, looking at and thematizing of an issue which represents amatter of course (and thus which is frequently implicit and beyond doubt), noticing of an issue scientists and philosophers thought and did not thought about, but also why they believed in what they believed that is what represents the main object of the presented research.