For th e historians, th e additional course III is n o t needed as it form s a p a rt of th e ir general braining; for the philosophers — correspondingly — th e special course IV is superfluous; for both of them the course II cannot be envisaged as th ey have no specialized training. For those who do not propose to become historians of science and technology th e item s III and IV a re unnecessary.
The realizing of th a t p lan necessitates th e creation of teaching m aterials concerning all those to u r groups of subjects. O ur In stitu te of th e H istory of Science and Technology is now proceeding to fuilfil th a t task.
J. R. Ravetz
I re g re t th a t I m u st disagree w ith Professor Ronchi, perhaps I am still (relatively) young and optim istic. In England and America th e situ atio n for h isto ry of science i:s very favourable. This m ay be because th e tran sitio n from “L ittle Science” to “Big Science” has been v ery rapid, an d th e scientists w ant help in understanding th e ir situation. The young Students I m eet do n o t believe th a t th ey a re learning absolute tru th s, rath er, th e ir a ttitu d e is ev en m ore dangerous — to them all th eir science is techniques and ‘‘conventions”.
In England we now find th a t there are m ore U niversity jobs th an com petent people to filll th em (unfo rtu n ately w e can each take only o ne lectureship); only te n years ago several excellent scholars (including Mason, L illey a n d Cardw ell) w e re unable to find positions as historians of .science.
It seems then, th a t we -can build a h ealth y discipline if we can fin d prom ising stu d en ts to train. O n th is point I m ust again disagree (with Professor Ranchi. There is no doubt th a t a specialist histo rian m ust be com petent to und erstan d the technical m aterial h e studies. Also, he m ust have th e sense of how research proceeds. But it is n o t necessary to be fu lly conversant w ith cu rren t progress in th e analogous field. Indeed, i t is useful, to b e forced to tra in oneself in th e technicalities of a science in a past period, for then one m ay gain a b etter apprecia tion of th e characteristic m ethods and problem s of th e p articu la r science.
W. Jew siew icki
Among m an y interesting problem s talk ed over by th e lecturer th e re a re those concerning the teaching of th e history of science and techno logy and the train in g of the research a n d didactic cadres. The problem s
D iscussion 297
raised correspond Clearly w ith those advanced iby Professor Taton in his rep o rt; th a t is Why d u rin g th e -discussion on th e advanced proposi tions, the form er’s sub ject m ay 'sometimes rep ea t itself, b e in common. The idea and th e sub ject of th e h isto ry of science and technology as well as its interrelatio ns w ere alre ad y thirashed o u t in the p reced en t days of th e Symposium. I w ish to v en tu re upon stating th a t all pro blems are clear, th a t th e historians of science and technology h av e come to an ag reem ent about the subject a n d purposefulness of th e ir research. This fact involves a great concern abo u t th e following generation o f historians of science and technology, a concern about new cadres of researchers.
It is, then, th e concrete -didactic problem s th a t ought to b e discussed. Including the h isto ry of science a n d technology in to th e stu d y pro gram m e of universities w ould g reatly avail. It is advisable to crea te chairs of history of science an d technology w hich sim ilarly to- those of o th er hum anistic disciplines w ill c a rry on b o th research a n d didactic activities.
W hat are those activities like?
My ow n point of view on th e scientific research w ork conducted by th e chair of the h isto ry of science and technology h as been presen ted during th e discussion on Professor T aton’s lecture. O ne should rem em ber th a t among th e p a rticu la r sciences composing th e h istory of science an d technology, th e histo ry of technology iis a sy n th etical science in itself — since it consists of histories of m any branches of technology.
T hat discipline alone presents, th en, m any (difficulties. A person w ith technological education w ill m eet — w hen sta rtin g th e in q uiries into th e history of technology — w ith fundam ental difficulties chiefly for w an t of know ledge of historical m ethods. A nalogically, a p erso n w ith historical education w ill m eet w ith difficulties owing to th e ignorance of technology. Considering th a t th e didactic w o rk er of a university type should be a specialist, th a t is a researcher of one of th e sciences — Which w as explicitly stressed b y Profesosr Ronchi — such a sta te of things does greatly com plicate th e problem s concerning the staff of th e Chair an d th e direction of its scientific research.
It stan d s to reason th a t th e chair ought to consist o f a team o f scientific w orkers among whom should probably be some specialists in different scientific disciplines. I believe — let it be repeated once again — th a t the first task of th e chair w ill be to s ta r t general inq u iries in th e w ay of the history of science and technology, as we'll as in q uiries aim ing to w ork out a m ethodology and a w orking technique both for research and didactic needs. The fu rth e r activities of th e chair w ill depend on th e degree of specialization of faculty m em bers, for exam ple the history o f social sciences, of n a tu ra l sciences, of medical sciences» of technological sciences and of technology.
U nlike th e historian of politics or economy, th e historian of science and technology, as of a synthetical discipline, ought to be a specialist in his ow n dom ain of science, for exam ple in th e h isto ry of optics, mechanics, shipbuilding o r in th e h istory of pedagogy, psycho
logy, sociology — a n d besides a specialist in th e synthesizing science o f a higher order: th e h istory of science a n d technology. Therein lies
the specificity of th e subject, th e specificity of difficulties linked w ith th e train in g of secondary school teachers a n d of fu tu r e researchers in th e w ay of th e h isto ry o f science and technology.
Such is, I' think, o nly th e transition al state in which — it is to be hoped — th e contem porary scientists w ill form , for them selves and for the fu tu re generation of scientific w orkers, th e methodological and m ethodical foundations of th e h isto ry of science a n d technology. The research a n d didactic effort is double fo r o u r generation, it w ill how ever considerably dim inish for th e stu d en ts w h o w ill have passed to an independent work. F or th ere w ill be n o 'ground for a double specialization: a p a rtic u la r and a general one; ithere w ill only rem ain a uniform science w ithout 'difficulties im posed upo n by the specificity o f th e su b ject of tran sitio n al period. The pioneers w ill leave th e field to com petent specialists in th e h isto ry of science a n d technology. Such is, I th in k, th e reason of history.
The didactic activities1 of th e ch air m ay 'be as follows:
In supposing th a t th e ch air is an accomplished fact; th a t it is headed by a professor specialized in th e h istory of one of th e branches of science and specialized in th e 'history of science a n d technology who sy nthetically approaches th e problem s composing it; th a t it is composed by a t least tw o m ore w orkers of a character sim ilar to th a t of th e professor — one m ay proceed to discuss th e form s a n d m ethods of teaching th e subject, a n d to discuss th e stu d y program m e.
F rom among tw o v aria n ts of locating th e chair — as an in ter-d ep art m ental ch air o r as a ch air attach ed to th e historical facu lty — I would chowse th e la tte r not o n ly because of the te rm ‘‘history” , b u t also' because of th e fa c t th a t the study of history, as reg ard s th e scope of its concern, begins to approxim ate m ore a n d m o re to th e history of science and technology.
The didactic activities of th e chair com prise lectu res an d exercises: 1) L ectures at all university departm ents for higher years of stu d y ■— as reg ard s th e national an d th e general h isto ry of science and technology.
2) L ectures in th e la st year of historical stu d y for students special izing in th e h isto ry of science and technology; from am ong th em the chair selects fu tu re scientific workers, 'Hence it follows th a t th e adepts in historical stu d y w ill become th e fu tu re highly qualified historians of science a n d technology.
D iscussion 299
3) Sem inars an d practiced studies, re fe rre d to by Professor Taton, on th e subject of various, concretely elaborated historical problem s o f p articu la r sciences o r on th e su b ject of frag m en tary questions in th e
field of th e history of science and technology.
I do not d isreg ard th e 'difficulties existing in th e dom ain of research an d of teaching th e history of technology. It is a h a rd thing for the histo rian to m aster th e extensive technological knowledge. In th e presen t case, th ere arises a new problem w hich we begin to touch every day. Who is to become a specialist, s tric tly speaking a specialist in th e w ay of research aind didactics? A professional h isto rian or a professional technician?
Since w e adm it th a t th e technological progress is, according to Professor Olszewski’s theses, a very im p o rtan t factor in th e h isto ry o f technology, th e scientific w o rk er w ho conducts in q u iries in to th e h isto ry of technology should have reg ard o n ly for th e n ew technological idea, the progressive and leading idea of a concrete historical period. He should, therefore, distinguish a technological achievem ent from inventions, appliances and constructions of a series type, th a t is of a ty p e th a t recu rs and — using th e sportsm an language — m erely equalizes th e achievem ent. This m ay be brought to effect only by a specialist in a given branch of technology. There w ere m an y in v en tions of th e telephone, w hich of them , however, w as on th e p a th of progress a n d p av ed th e w ay for developm ent?
The historian w ill get lost in those m atters, an d even th e consulting technician will o ften n o t be able to help him. On th e o th er hand, the technician w ho investigates the h isto ry of a certain branch of technology w ith o u t know ing th e historical m ethods w ill give n o th in g Jbut an enum eration of inventions and will find difficulties in connecting his stu d y w ith th e epoch, w ith social influences, w ith th e reactio n of eco nomic, legal and o th e r phenom ena. Some of th e historians claim th a t th e technological values of a n achievem ent in th e dom ain of technology, m ade out by th e historians w ith a n inadequate precision w ill be a lesser evil th a n th e estrangem ent of technology, th ro ug h ignorance, from the g en eral social phenom ena.
It is w orth w hile to speak about those m a tte rs for th ey are, too, of no little im portance in th e didactic studies, m ore p articu la rly in seminars. An inexact and even vague inform ation in th e w ay of techno logy does im m ediately arouse dubitatioms am ong students, freq u en tly in terested in technological problem s. A t a n y rate, w hen conducting practical studies of technological problem s, even of v ery general ones, o n e m ust alw ays be p re p a re d for various ex p lan ato ry questions.
It seems to me th a t inquiries in to th e h isto ry of science and technology ought to be carried on ra th e r b y professional historians —• w ith ou t excluding, however, th e technicians. A harm o niou s collabora
tion of both specialists is also possible, w hich has been confirm ed by the previous practice.
In spite of those fears and reservations, m y ow n belief is th a t th e history of science and technology can be, m astered indeed, as an independent speciality. I assum e how ever th a t for th e fu tu re historian of scienbe a n d technology th e re w ill be available both m onographs on th e history of the m ain disciplines of science and technology, and instructional aids as w ell as m anuals of un iversity type.
As reg ard s th e teaching, it is — in m y opinion — necessary to refleot once m ore upon locating didactics a n d upon th e kinds o f stu dents attend ing th e lectu res of h istory of science a n d technology. Considering the fact th a t th e su bject of th e history of science and technology is a common one a n d its division (into the h isto ry of science an d th e histo ry of technology) w ould be, for methodological reasons, illegitim ate, th ere arises a question of p ractical utility. There are sepa ra te centres for teaching hum anities and n atu ra l science, technological a n d m edical science. It is th e case in Poland at least.
In which of these centres th e research and th e teaching of th e history of science and technology as o f a uniform sub ject should be located?
I th in k th a t each of the scientific cen tres ought to possess its ow n chair of history of science an d technology Where n o t only general problem s of research an d didactics w ould b e conducted, b u t also- p a rt icular problem s which a re of in terest for th e given centre.
Professor Ronchi raised in h is lectu re an o th er im p o rtan t problem of practical character. Who is to le ctu re o n the history of science and technology, and w ho is to investigate it? I think, one an d th e same person only. Who' w ants to lecture on his ow n subject in an in terestin g an d useful way, has to know i t thoroughly, has to be th e investigator of a given problem . Let me em phasize once m ore th a t I do not tru s t the w orkers concerned w ith th e hum anities who do not conduct any practical studies w ith students w ith in th e scope of th e ir ow n research w ork.
A. T. Grigoryan
Professor Romchi’s lectu re is devoted to a v ery topical subject: to the teaching of th e history of science in th e higher educational establishm ents.
I should like to share m y ow n experience in th e w ay of teaching the history of science and technology in th e U.S.S.R. In the Soviet Union th ere are about one thousand in stitu tio n s of higher learning. In o rd er to supply all of them w ith in structo rs in th e h isto ry of science
