Connecting historiographical traditions (original) (raw)
Related papers
Ambix, 2019
Stefano Bordoni’s new volume addresses the intellectual debates over science, its methods, and tasks, taking place in France over a span of thirty years, roughly from the 1860s to the 1890s. The core aim of the book is to show that in the second half of the nineteenth century decisive steps were taken towards refined and critical views on science. Such “sophisticated” views replaced naïve accounts of science, which are mainly identified with the positivist philosophy of science of Auguste Comte and his epigones. The general thesis that the popularity of original positivism and the faith in the progressive nature of science were strongly declining by the end of the nineteenth century is not particularly new. However, Bordoni gives additional substance to it by shedding light on less well-known corners of these debates, and by unearthing the contributions of neglected thinkers.
[AAC/CFP] 4èmes Journées d'études sur l'Epistémologie Historique (Paris, 24-26 mai 2018)
A l'échelle internationale, la seconde moitié du XX e siècle a vu émerger différentes tentatives pour penser la « désunité » des sciences. Celles-ci se sont constituées en réponse au monisme méthodologique issu du Cercle de Vienne, stipulant l'unité de la science et donc la validité du projet d'une philosophie de « la » science. Ainsi, dès la fin des années 1960, la philosophie de la biologie a voulu affirmer la spécificité des sciences du vivant et donc l'obligation de se départir des canons de la philosophie de la physique. Au cours de la décennie suivante, on constate l'institutionnalisation de plusieurs philosophies « des sciences spéciales » : de la biologie, de la géographie, de la médecine, etc. Bien que ces différentes philosophies soient aussi pensées comme des sous-disciplines d'une philosophie générale de la science ou des sciences, cette spécialisation vient mettre à mal la longue tradition d'affirmation de l'unité de la science fondée sur un réductionnisme physico-chimique.
Historical epistemology and the “marriage” between history and philosophy of science
"The Past, the Present, and the Future of Integrated History and Philosophy of Science" ed. by Emily Herring, Kevin M. Jones, Konstantin S. Kiprijanov, and Laura M. Sellers (London: Routledge, 2019)
The current proliferation and heated-discussion of the meaning and use of the expression “historical epistemology” in prevalently Anglophone domains (Feest & Sturm 2011; Hacking 1999) is anything but an ephemeral phenomenon introducing a transitory “brand into the market of ideas” (Gingras 2010). On the contrary, the discussion revolves around enduring difficulties in conceptualizing the correct or most fruitful interaction between history and philosophy of science. As I will argue, this recent questioning of historical epistemology can be retraced to the longstanding and prevalently Anglophone debate over the “marriage” between history and philosophy of science (Giere 1973). This debate arose in the 1960s (inter alia Hanson 1962; Kuhn 1962), picked up momentum at the beginning of the 1990s, and, thanks to renewed interest, continued on into the twenty-first century (Domski & Dickinson 2010; Laudan & Laudan 2016). My suggestion is that this renewed interest can be fruitfully framed within a French philosophical context. In particular, I will contrast the naturalizing trend prevalent in certain areas of the Anglophone debate (Laudan 1977; Giere 1988; Kitcher 2011) with the “normative turn” instantiated by French epistemology and by Gaston Bachelard and Georges Canguilhem in particular (Bachelard 1934; Canguilhem 2005). With this comparative study I hope to contribute to the ongoing discussion about the different ways of integrating history and philosophy of science.
Introduction to special issue of Histories: (New) Histories of Science, in and beyond Modern Europe
Special issue of "Histories" (https://www.mdpi.com/journal/histories/special\_issues/histories\_of\_science)), 2024
In this Special Issue, (New) Histories of Science, in and beyond Modern Europe, we do not attempt to provide an all-encompassing overview of all research areas, methodological and theoretical approaches, and narratives that constitute the histories of the various sciences. Instead, we present contributions on a broad spectrum of current research topics and (new) approaches, highlighting their ramifications and illustrating their ties to neighboring disciplines and (interdisciplinary) areas of research, e.g., philosophy of science, science and technology studies, gender studies, or intellectual history. Moreover, the contributions exemplify how histories of science can be written in ways that not only move across but also challenge temporal and spatial categories and categorizations, including hegemonic understandings of “modernity”, Eurocentric views of the development of science and the humanities, or certain notions of center-periphery. They deal with histories of specific disciplines, specific research objects and phenomena, and with specific practices, while they also explore the historicity of certain ideals of scientificity (in the sense of the German Wissenschaftlichkeit). Furthermore, some papers are dedicated to selected methods and perspectives of current approaches in the histories of science. Among them is a focus on practices, including the everyday actions involved in engaging in science, but also on the specific spaces and places of knowledge production, as well as on the media of knowledge transfer and communication.
When Historiography Met Epistemology
Transversal: International Journal for the Historiography of Science
Review of Bordoni, Stefano. When historiography met epistemology: Sophisticated histories and philosophies of science in French-speaking countries in the second half of the nineteenth centuryReviewed by Jean-François Stoffel
hiStory: A perspective in the interface between science in the making and the philosophical stance
Abstract: Our project focuses on the difficulties resulting from the absence of a gold standard, a God's eye, that could mediate the relation between world and language. Narrative and literary dimensions of our way of providing meaning to the world become theme and problem, something that cause awe. In our attempt to navigate the interplay between reality and fiction in an interpretation game, our investigation first evaluates the debate between Umberto Eco and Richard Rorty regarding the limits of interpretation, focusing on a historiographic perspective. From this platform, the concept of hiStory emerges, here focusing on its interplay with the process of scientific investigation with a focus on its practical implications. Finally, we draw conclusions following the adoption of a Rortyan perspection on epistemology, taking projects to be priors to principles, be them methodological, interpretative, or others, with a special emphasis on the political dimension of the result "production." Keywords: Rorty, Eco, Interpretation, Epistemology, History