• Nie Znaleziono Wyników

About the periodization of the history of science and technology

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "About the periodization of the history of science and technology"

Copied!
5
0
0

Pełen tekst

(1)
(2)

ABOUT THE PERIODIZATION O F THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

The developm ent of science and. technology all over, th e earth throughout th e en tire course of h u m an h isto ry co n stitu tes so vast a process th a t, in o rd er to be understood in its im m ense com plexity, it m ust necessarily 'be 'divided into periods. Periodization is absolutely indispensable for th e teaching of th e subject, since w ith o u t such assistance th e student w ould inevitably b e bew ildered b y th e m ass of tan g led inform ation 'Confronting 'him. N evertheless, th e subdivision of th e evolution of science and technology in to co nstituen t perio'ds should n o t be regard ed m erely as a useful pedagogical device. The teach er a n d research historian him self cannot hope to deal successfully w ith th e enorm ous am ount of m aterial available to him unless h e introduces in to it some schem e of periodization.

Such schem es m ay be classified as e ith e r ex tern al o r in tern al. By a n “ex tern a l” scheme, I m ean one im ported into th e h isto ry of science from some o th er m ore settled discipline, such as political history. By contrast, a n “in te rn a l” periodization em erges from a stu d y of th e developm ent of a p articu la r science, considered b y itself. For a n exam ple of an extern al scheme, le t m e re fe r to th e h isto ry of m y ow n country. There it is custom ary to speak of th e “colaniiall p eriod” in th e h isto ry of A m erican science, b u t su rely th is is a periodization tra n sfe rre d to th e history of science fro m political history. As a n exam ple of in te rn a l periodization, I w ould point to th e division of the history of obser­ vational astronom y into th ree periods: naked-eye, telescopic, and radio. It is un do ub ted ly easier to borrow read y-m ad e categories th a n to elicit them from th e b are facts. B ut if th e h isto ry of A m erican science w ere studied in itself, w ithout a n y referen c e to th e political background, w ould th e scientific w o rk of Americans, w h en th ey w ere colonial subjects of th e B ritish crown, be sufficiently d iffere n t from th e scientific w ork done in th e ea rly years o f th e new rep u b lic to w a rra n t th e in tro ­

(3)

22 0 E. Rosen

duction of a period in th e 'history of A m erican science to coincide w ith th e attain m en t o f political independence from B ritain? The achievem ent of political independence ind u b itab ly 'Contributed in th e course o f time to th e advancem ent of A m erican trad e and in d u stry ; th e desire to destro y obstacles to th a t advancem ent u n q u estionably h elped to foster th e m ovem ent for independence. B ut w ere th e y ears 1776 o r 1789 genuine turn ing -p o in ts in th e history of A m erican science a n d techno­ logy?

P olitical 'history is n o t th e only discipline from w hich a schem e of periodization is im posed on th e history of science. In ce rta in circles it is becoming increasingly fashionable, for instance, to speak of the period of baroque m athem atics. This expression m ay o riginally h av e been put forw ard in a ll innocence as a label for th e m athem atics produced w hen baroque architectu re w as in style. B ut ‘^baroque m athem atics” has come to be tak en as th e designation of a m athem atics w hich differed from th e previous m athem atics in th e sam e w ay a s th a t in w hich baroque arch itectu re differed from th e preceding arch itectu ral tren d . A nd this tran sferen ce has been m ade w ith o u t a careful in q u iry into' the charac­ teristics of th e m athem atical w ork being done w hile th e dom inant taste in arch itecture w as undergoing th e change to baroque.

We have seen how h arm ful iit can be w ith o u t due caution to carry over to' th e history of science schemes of periodization th a t are suitable to o th e r 'disciplines. We should b e equally on g u a rd against periodiza­ tions w hich are p u t forw ard for purposes extraneous to th e im p artial stud y of th e h isto ry of science. Thus, a weill-known tre a tise divided the e n tire h istory o f astronom y in to th re e periods: prim itive, Greco- Babylonian, and G erm an (some of the prom inent astronom ers in th e G erm an period 'being Galileo, Newton, and Laplace). N aturally, this periodization w as n ot received w ith m uch enthusiasm in Italy, England, an d France. Even in G erm any th is m isuse of periodization fo r purposes of nationalistic propaganda h as no t b een generally accepted.

A th ird k in d of extraneous pressu re affects th e slicing o f th e history of science in to separate perio'ds. For exam ple, ce rta in scholars seek to prolong the Middle Ages later and later into th e Renaissance, and some have even gone so f a r a s to d en y th a t th e re was, a n y Renaissance a t all. A re these stren u o u s efforts 'based solely on historical grounds, o r a re they perhaps m otivated by a desire to safeguard th e prestige of the institutions dom inant in th e Middle Ages? F o r if indeed th ere w as a Renaissance, th e n it m ust have entailed1 a reb ou nd from a depressed level, a n d in q u irin g m inds w ould th e n be tem pted to ask : “Who or w hat w as responsible for th e depressing of th e scientific level?” The answ ers to th is question m ig ht w ell im pair th e rep u ta tio n of forces Which a re still v e ry pow erful in o ur time.

(4)

ex tern al or in ternal, th e re can be no g u aran tee th a t it ■will fit equally w ell th e history of science and the h isto ry of technology. Science and technology a re evidently in te rre la te d enterprises. N evertheless th e re have been tim es in h u m an history w h en thedr effects upo n each o th e r have been l!ess decisive th a n a t present. T h ere h av e even been epochs w hen science a n d technology w ere scarcely o n speaking te rm s w ith each other, w hen th e craftsm an had no theoretical train in g a n d th e scientist h a d no in te re st in practical problem s. A schem e of periodiza­ tion /suitable to science d u rin g such a n epoch of estran g em en t betw een han d and brain could scarcely b e expected to fit technology, and vice versa.

If we should be on g u ard against assum ing in advance th a t a n y scheme of periodization suitable for science w ould fit technology eq u ally w ell, w e Should be equ ally on g u ard against assum ing th a t w hat holds tru e fo r one bran ch of science holds tru e for all o th e rs to th e sam e degree. W ould anyone seriously m ain tain th a t all th e b ran ch es of science sw ung u pw ard in one unified m ovem ent a t one time, a n d th e n rev ersed th e ir direction a n d dropped idown together? U nfortunately, th e tre e of scientific knowledge did not grow and droop w ith such convenient uniform ity. Some branches expanded ea rly a n d rap id ly ; others rem ained m ere twigs; still oth e rs th re w o u t num ero u s offshoots and flourished m ightily. In sober tru th , the tree of scientific know ledge looks lop-sided. No one -simple un ifo rm p a tte rn of developm ent is discernible in all its branches. No single scheme of periodization fits all th e branches of th e tree of scientific know ledge.

If th e preceding description has n o t m issed its m ark, th e p roper periodization of science an d technology rem ains un finished business. As a tem porary m easure, th e conventional schem es of periodization now in use m ay be continued, since some form of (periodization is essential. But th e conventional schemes, w hich are m ain ly ex tern al in origin, should be regarded as m erely tentative. M eanwhile, th e research -workers in each field of science a n d technology should u n d erta k e a n activ e quest for th e scheme of periodization m ost ap p ro p riate for th e ir field of special interest. If an y proposed schem e gains general approval, p re ­ sum ably i t w ill be, n o t ex tern a l in origin, -but ra th e r in tern al, arising o u t of th e u n iq ue h isto ry o f th a t discipline. It w ill be adopted, not for the sake of convenience, b ut because it fit® th e historical facts best. It w ill no t help -to prom ote a n y one-sided propaganda, -campaign; for if it did, it w ould not w in w idespread approval. It w ould not consist m erely of -catchy p hrases o r fashionable expressions, for it w ould be based on solid research a n d it w ould be -designed to endure as th e p erm an en t fram ew ork for fu rth e r investigations.

If th e foregoing program a ttra c ts a su fficient am ount of a tten tio n on th e p a rt of research w o rk ers thro ug h o u t th e w orld, we m ay some day

(5)

2 22 E. Rosen

see, in a ll th e various fields of science a n d technology, su itab le schemes of periodization proposed, discussed, revised, and adopted. Then it w ill be tim e to consider how fa r such schem es can be generalized, to w h at ex ten t a schem e originating in one field can be applied to rela ted fields. P erhaps it m ay even b e possible to envisage, as th e end re su lt of this process, a schem e of periodization th at w ould be applicable to th e to tality of science a n d technology, ta k en together. Such a n all-em bracing scheme m ight bear little, if any, resem blance to th e custom ary periodization. B ut even if ,the overarching su p erstru ctu re should tu r n o u t in th e end to duplicate, in whole o r in p a rt, th e conventional schem es now in c u r­ r e n t use, a t le a st it w ould h av e 'been adopted, not to avoid h ard w ork or to fla tte r th e m ighty o r w ould-be m ighty, b u t because it w as the best schem e of periodization that- could be devised on th e basis of honest, un prejudiced research devoted exclusively to fu rth erin g th e correct u nd erstan din g of th e h isto ry of science an d technology.

Cytaty

Powiązane dokumenty

[r]

10 presents the temperature and degree of cure evolution of the conservative points for the 50 mm flat panel in the case when convection coefficient is not used as optimisation

Main factors Least important factor: Institutional factors Demand Service level Product characteristics Logistics costs Location factors Institutional factors X Firm

Het rapport mag slechts woordelijk en in zijn geheel worden gepubliceerd na schriftelijke toestemming.. Het rapport mag slechts woordelijk en in zijn geheel worden

Existing reasoning frameworks for designing adaptive software systems facilitate only specific aspects such as context awareness or knowledge modeling and management to support

MADE IH GERMANY... MADE

W opublikowanej na łamach „Przeglądu Humanistycznego” recenzji trzech pier­ wszych tomów serii podkreśliłem: „Nieodzowne są streszczenia artykułów -

informacje na temat jakuckiej rodziny pisarza (ożenił się z Ariną Czełba-Kysa, ze związku tego urodziła się córka Maria).. Z kolei Grażyna Jakimińska w swym