P R E M I È R E P A R T I E
COMMUNICATION
I D. J. de Solia Price
THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE AS TRAINING AND RESEARCH FOR ADMINISTRATION AND POLITICAL DECISION-M AKING
To all of us w hose professional life is concerned w ith research and teaching in th e H istory of Science it lis clea r tlhialt the' la s t few decades have brought, in m any countries, a considerable en largem en t of th e scope an d im portance of o u r subject. M any fuill-time academ ic posts now exist, m an y b rig h t young stu d en ts are now entering th e field and receiving special train in g w ith in it.
As some indication of this, th e In stitu te of th e H istory of Science an d Technology of th e Polish Academ y o f Sciences now hais 26 scientific w orkers on its staff, an d o u r own D epartm en t a t Ya!le U niversity (just one of nine m ajo r departm ents in U.S. universities) w ith a professional staff of some six teachers together wilth several additional p a rt-tim e mem bers a n d distinguished visitors from o th er countries now deals w ith about 100 undergraduates, 20 g rad u ate students an d four o r five post-doctoral students- each year.
This trem endous poslt-War increase is, of 'course, a reflectio n of th e grow th of science and technology w ith in o u r civilization. .Though for m any cen turies they have h eld im portant place, phiiiosophic in terest a n d even m aterial benefit, i t is o nly com paratively rece n tly 'that th ey h ave become a num erous occupation an d a n expensive one. In th e m ost developed countries, train ed scientists a n d technologists have becom e th e largest group in th e hig hly skilled labor force, a n d ex p en ditu re on research a n d development, now standing a t several p erce n t of th e Gross National P roduct is grow ing so fast th a t if it w ere .continued it w ould consume th e w hole before th e end of th is century.
W ith science amd technology now g enerally recognized as th e m ost potent activities o f man, the producers of so- imudh o f o u r economic stren g th a n d political power, and the consum ers of so m uch of our n a tional resources of m anpow er an d money, it is only n a tu ra l th a t th e re should be am increased dem and for th e stu d y of this science and tech
2 2 D. J. de S o lla Price
nology a's a ,hum an activity. Growing o u t of studies tfhat w ere already Old at th e beginning of this century, th e re is no do ubt th a t H istory of Science (including H istory of Technology iand H istory of Medicine) and (Philosophy of Science have becam e recognized a n d w ell-integrated aca
demic disciplines w ith a corpus of lite ra tu re and techniques of their own, rosipectahle su bjects th a t call fo rth in th e stu d en t ju st as m uch perspiration an d inspiration as a n y o th er su b ject including research in the sciences them selves.
Though the H istory a n d th e Philosophy of Science have come first to fruition, th e y 'do not include all the m an y w ays in w hich one m ay m ake a stu d y of th e place of science an d technology w ith in civilization and h u m an activity. F urtherm ore, our goals a s scholars a n d teachers concerned w ith th e understanding and explication of these subjects are not by an y m eans 'all th a t we could be doing w ith in th e fram ew orks of m odern universities an d research institutes. In terestin g ly enough, the first point, th a t H istory an d Philosophy of Science b y themselves a re not enough, w as first elaborated by tw o Polish scholars, M aria and Stanislaw Ossowski, in a n article introducing a n inelegant but now m uch-used term , The Science of Science (“O rganon”, Vol. 1, 1935), more th a n a q u a rte r of a cen tu ry ago. Though th e basic studies are even now hardly developed, th e y w ere able th e n to point o ut th e n eed fo r a general scholarly analysis a n d understanding of such th in g s as the psychology of scientists a n d of scientific discovery, th e sociology of th e scientific professions, an d th e com parative stu d y o f scientific institutions, th e economics of scientific research a n d th e form ation of social an d state policy.
The 'last few decades h ave seen th e publication of m an y pioneering investigations in fields such as these, e.g. those of Robert M erton and B ernard B arber in th e Sociology of Science, of A nne Roe in th e Psycho logy o f Scientists, a n d of S tefan D edijer in th e analysis o f scientific policy of states. My ow n work has been p a rtly concerned w ith statistical econom etric trea tm e n t of science, p a rtly historical, p a rtly m odern. W hat seems especially in terestin g is th a t th ese studies, as th ey develop, seem to flow n a tu ra lly o u t of th e corpus of H istory of Science, deriving from it m uch useful m aterial an d lending to it a n increased understanding of its own problem s.
Though th e w ork of M aria and Stanislaw Ossowski w as a generation ahead of th e ir time, la te r (developments have justified th e ir faith th a t a w ider subject, th e so-called S c i e n c e o f S c i e n c e , was a viable w hole and w ould come into being. To be realistic we m u st how ever adm it th a t th e subjects auxiliary to the history and philosophy of science have not developed nearly so much as those central disciplines. For those of us w ithin U niversities and research institutes, th e m ajor task is th a t of teaching a n d research in th e h isto ry o r philosophy of science, while the
The H isto ry of S cience and P o litica l D ecision -M akin g 23
sociology, psychology, economics a n d research policy studies m u st ta k e secondary place for occasional excursions b y us and b y o u r colleagues is neighbouring academ ic departm ents. P a rt of th e d ifficu lty has, of course, been th e fragm entation of ithe m odern academ ic life th a t, e.g. rem oves th e h isto rian of science from contact w ith th e sociologist o r econom ist o r political analyst, b u t an o th er reason is th a t th e re has been p erh aps too little dem and upon th e h isto rian of science him self.
R ecent developm ents a re mow beginning to m ake such dem ands upon o u r profession. In terestin g ly enough th ey m ake them in a w ay th a t now seem s ra th e r close to th e S c i e n c e o f S c i e n c e - a s im agined by th e Ossowskis. In th e U.S.A. and, I believe, in th e U.S.S.R. too, th e great com plexities of organizing the science an d technology of th e nation have given occassion for w ork b y a rising body of specialists w hose business it is to stu d y a n d a tte m p t to u nd erstan d sudh problem s as th e relatio n betw een science an d technology, th e relatio n s b etw een the various sciences, th e process o f discovery, th e rela tiv e cost of various sizes of effort in th e m ore expensive fields of accelerators and rockets, etc. M any such experts, of course, a re draw n fro m the ra n k s of th e older a n d m ore experienced scientists. C learly this w ill always b e so. B ut in ad d itio n to these, it seems also reasonable th a t m en w ho h av e devoted th e ir efforts to> th e un derstand in g of historical developm ent of science should in m any cases be pecu liarly an d specially capable in having a g reater feel for science and its processes th a n a n y “m ere” scientific specialist. They should h ave som ething of th e sam e sort o f general .aptitude yis-a- -vis science as th a t w hich for age im m em orial has m ade it a m a tte r of norm al educational policy for w ould-be asp irants to governm ent to stu d y history itself.
Thus, there seems to be growing some corpus of know ledge and expertise Which stands in relatio n to science as economics does to business or a r t h isto ry to th e artist, or th e academ ic stu d y of lite ra tu re to th e au th o r and th e poet. In th is corpus it is now o u r subject, th e h istory of science w hich seems casit in th e leading rdle, a s the moist m ature, mosJt w ell-developed of al!l th e re la te d sUb-disciplines th a t are
needed. i
One should not, I suggest, m ake any Claim th a t history of science is alread y the theoretical basis of |a .new applied science of th e organisa tion of science, b u t only th a t it is beginning to serve an in terestin g function in this direction. ,If even th a t is so, it does ad d ra th e r con siderably to th e im portance of o u r subject as a un iversity discipline, a n d it also provides a ra th e r deep n a tu ra l rep ay m en t b y o u r profession to th e natio n al purposes in whose in te re st “Big Science” has been created a n d has sp u rre d o u r studies.
For some tim e, I suppose and hope, th e g reater n um ber of our stu d en ts and th e read ers of o u r m onographs w ill be those whose in te re st
24 D. J. de S olla P rice
in th e history of science is m otivated 'by the same p u re scholarship th a t hals led u s to th is field. I th in k how ever th a t in addition to th is w e m u st allow th a t w e have a considerable responsibility w ith in th e univ ersity in teaching o u r su bject as p a rt of a general education ,for citizens to live in this scientific age, m ore especially as p a rt of th e m o re special education needed by those whose task it w ill be to take governm ent and executive and advisory positions in its organization. I feel it is high ly desirable for h istorians of science to be sensitive to this function th ey can serv e in th e com munity, an d to this end th ey jmight w ell give th o u g h t to d irecting some of th e ir teaching and research effortls in these directions.
In o u r ow n d ep artm en t w e now have m an y 'undergraduates and some graduate stu d en ts whose chief in terests a re in adm inistration and in its theoretical bases, a n d furtherm o re, it is n o t uncom m on for o u r facu lty and even o u r Students to carry o u t researdh, som etim es as historians, som etim es in th e alm ost n on -existent fields isuch as economics of science, but alw ays directed to p a rtic u la r needs a n d problem s w hich have been re ferred to ius b y such bodies a!s the N ational Science Foundation or o th er sta te or business institutions for whom we act as advisers an d
consultants.
I t m ay indeed be tim e for Some serious effort to be m ade by .the w orld’s historians of science to ad ju st them selves to th e actu ality of this S c i e n c e o f S c i e n c e and to see w hat w e m ight do to help see th a t th e m ost p o ten t forces An th is m odern w orld a re organized for th e good of m ankind in th e lig h t of the best historical perspective w e can bring to them .
