Philosophy and Conceptual History of Science in Taiwan

1993 ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 463-474
Author(s):  
Robert Marc Friedman

The Department of History of Science at Johns Hopkins shaped by Harry Woolf and Robert H. Kargon brought together diverse scholars who nevertheless shared a basic outlook. Historical questions and scholarly craft took precedent over theo-retical or historiographic positioning. At the same time, students were allowed great freedom to explore and develop new perspectives for analyzing science historically. When Russell McCormmach arrived in Baltimore in the fall of 1972, he joined a departmental culture of intellectual tolerance and forthright expres-sion. In paying homage to Russ and the department I illuminate the departmental culture into which Russ entered, Russ's seminars and academic mentoring, and .nally Russ's vision for combining art and scholarship. Russ shared a deep affection for solid conceptual history of physics while supporting our ventures into new historiographic terrain.


2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eirini Goudarouli

The special section “Knowledge Quests in the European Periphery” attempts to explore the different ways in which conceptual history’s methodologies could be applied to disciplines with which traditional conceptual historians have not previously engaged, such as the history of science, political economy, Enlightenment studies, postcolonial history, and transnational history. This special section, when read as a whole, opens up a multidisciplinary space in which center-periphery tensions are examined in the context of conceptual transnational exchange. Coming from different geographical places and cultural spaces within the European periphery, the three case studies draw their methodological background from conceptual history and aim to reflect on the center-periphery dichotomy by asking how historians from different historiographical traditions could take advantage of the methods and theories of conceptual history, as well as how conceptual history could take advantage of the coming together of disciplines that traditionally do not communicate with each other.


1990 ◽  
Vol 35 (7) ◽  
pp. 654-656
Author(s):  
Harry Beilin

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 58-66
Author(s):  
Giuliano Pancaldi

Here I survey a sample of the essays and reviews on the sciences of the long eighteenth century published in this journal since it was founded in 1969. The connecting thread is some historiographic reflections on the role that disciplines—in both the sciences we study and the fields we practice—have played in the development of the history of science over the past half century. I argue that, as far as disciplines are concerned, we now find ourselves a bit closer to a situation described in our studies of the long eighteenth century than we were fifty years ago. This should both favor our understanding of that period and, hopefully, make the historical studies that explore it more relevant to present-day developments and science policy. This essay is part of a special issue entitled “Looking Backward, Looking Forward: HSNS at 50,” edited by Erika Lorraine Milam.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document