Social Constructionism and Historiography of Science
In the historiography of science, the debate between intenalists and externalists has been one of the major fault lines over the past century. While many historians are not specialists in physics, chemistry and biology, by training and experience they also consider the political, economic and cultural influences on any institution and organization in a given period, and science his not been exempt from historicism. Internlaists found that scientific progress was generally driven forward by geniuses like Isaac Newton, Louis Pasteur, Charles Darwin, Antoine Lavoisier and Albert Einstein, and that their discoveries about nature were objectively true regardless of external social and political considerations. For externalists and social constructionists, however, all of these scientists were products of a certain historical and cultural milieu, which influenced their work in many ways. For example, according to Boris Hessen and Robert Merton, Newton and the 17th Century English scientists were influenced by Puritanism and the Whig-capitalist revolution of that period, while Bruno Latour asserted that Pasteur was part of a much broader social and public health movement in the 19th Century that facilitated the acceptance of his discoveries. In the case of Albert Einstein, politics and ideology led to attacks on his theories in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, while Britain and the United States benefitted militarily in the Second World War by their more open attitudes toward the new physics. In addition, the politicization of Darwinism in the form of Social Darwinism and eugenics, particularly in Nazi Germany, led to catastrophic consequences, but the Soviet Union also suffered by rejecting Mendelian genetics completely as a 'fascist' science. Probably the most influential history of science books in the last half century has been Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, which combined the Great Man theory with a kind of externalism and social constructionism in which paradigm shifts in science occurred because of a change in generations, with younger scientists more likely to accept new ideas than older, more established ones.
According to Bruno Latour, even though Louis Pasteur received most of the credit for proving that microorganisms caused disease, he was in reality just a small part of a much broader social and political movement in the 19th Century that already accepted the basic idea of contagious diseases and the need for public health and hygiene measures to combat them. Even though very few people today "still believe in the advent of the Enlightenment…nobody has yet recovered from this loss of faith." [footnoteRef:1] Only naive epistemology still holds that science is uniquely set apart from politics, culture and history. Pasteur's 'revolution' took place "at the high point of the scientific religion," although only "extreme cynics" could doubt the true value of his discoveries.[footnoteRef:2] These were applied far more quickly than any others in the history of science, and his belief that invisible microbes caused disease was already widely shared in the 1870s and 1880s. His victory also took place in the aftermath of defeat in the Franco-Prussian War when public discussions about methods for improving national health, wealth and strength were intense. [1: Bruno Latour. The Pasteurization of France. Harvard University Press, 1988, p. 5.] [2: Latour, p. 8.]
Latour studied the relevant scientific literature from the 1870s to the early-20th Century, such as the journal of the Pasteur Institute, the Councours Medical and the Revue Scientifique and determined that germs, microbes and public hygiene were common areas of concern far beyond Pasteur's discoveries. He was interests not only in the content of chemistry and biology of the time but also their social, political and economic context. A wide variety of groups and interests had a stake in Pasteur's discoveries, including biologists, surgeons, veterinarians, military doctors and public health officials. He asks whether Pasteur created a scientific revolution as Thomas Kuhn theorized, or whether he was simply part of a much broader social and scientific movement. He may have been one of the Great Men of history, or even a Napoleon of science, but the transformation did not depend solely on "the great genius of a simple man."[footnoteRef:3] Pasteur had help, even though most of the helpers are long forgotten today, and these other groups were not simply "inert masses" that passively adapted to Pasteur.[footnoteRef:4] Physicians and scientists were already very concerned about public health in the large cities and the population loss from contagious diseases long before Pasteur, and the public hygiene movement had "already prepared the ground for the arrival of the Pasteurians."[footnoteRef:5] National health was necessary to ensure that the cities would...
C. Only fragments of these works, which include two letters and four speeches, survive (Sallust). In the Preface to the Second Impression, John C. Rolfe (May 15, 1928) purports: The part of the Introduction dealing with the manuscripts has been re-written in the light of the new classification of Axel W. Ahlberg (Prolegomena in Sallustium, Gteborg, 1911), which was followed by him in his Teubner text (Leipzig, 1919) and, except in some
These gang-related activities had a negative effect on the very industries on which Macau depended for much of its economic activity, and tourism dropped by almost 10% in 1998 (Kurtlantzick 1). A Macanese resident summed up the situation thusly: "I still won't walk around at night . . . And every sound makes me think of a gunshot" (quoted in Kurtlanzick at 1). In an interview with Macao's present
Scott paints a vivid picture of the social history of the area; lack of lumber for support, lack of trained people to help with the safety issues and a lack of understanding their new regime. Scott also describes what we know now as the Soviet double standard; the propaganda of healthy workers building a socialist paradise coupled with the reality of millions dying of cold and hunger. However, Scott
Historiography of the Cold War Why and how the Cold War ended became the question of the day after the Berlin Wall came down in 1989. To people whose lives had long been circumscribed, if not terrified, by Cold War-related events, the remarkable disintegration of the Soviet Union, the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, and the reunification of Germany signified the end of one era and the beginning of
Blassingame presents his information in a more unbiased manner. Perhaps he was worried of being accused of bias because he was black, and so, he worked hard to eliminate it from his work. Whatever the reason, his book seems the most balanced and effective of all these works, partly because he does not moralize, he simply presents the facts, as he knows them. Later he writes that the whites often
Chinese-American History The Exclusion Act; Redefining Citizenship Historians have studied the Chinese Exclusion Act extensively and have recorded many aspects of the politics behind the events. However, they often focus their attentions on the motives of the excluders. They pay little attention to those that were excluded and the impact that it had on their lives. One important question has escaped the scrutiny of historians. Why, if they knew of the hardships
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now