Reframing the Sciences of the Long Eighteenth Century

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.

1988 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan Sivin

Sinology and the history of science have changed practically beyond recognition in the past half-century. Both have become academic specialisms, with their own departments, journals, and professional societies. Both have moved off in new directions, drawing on the tools and insights of several disciplines. Although some sinologists still honor no ambition beyond explicating primary texts, on many of the field's frontiers philology is no more than a tool. Similarly, many technical historians now explore issues for which anthropology or systems analysis is as indispensable as traditional historiography.


2018 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 487-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Howard M. Wachtel

Fifty years on, the Review of Radical Political Economics ( RRPE) lives on against the odds that such a quixotic 1968 adventure could survive for half a century. As the first managing editor of the RRPE and one of the founders of the Union for Radical Political Economics (URPE), I have compiled a history of the first five years of the journal and the organization. This retrospective is primarily based on archival research, supplemented by my recollections. It concludes with some thoughts on how URPE and the RRPE affected the study and uses of economics in the past half century.


2000 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-4
Author(s):  
Judith T. Sowder

The beginning of a new year as well as the threshold of a new century and a new millennium seem appropriate times to take stock of where we have been and where we are going as a mathematics education research community. We have accomplished a great deal in the past half century of our existence, and I for one look forward to reading the forthcoming book on the history of mathematics education, edited by Jeremy Kilpatrick and George Stanic. That book will review for us our progress thus far, but what are the challenges we now face? This question will be addressed in various ways at various gatherings in the coming year, and new agendas will result from those discussions.


Author(s):  
Reinhard Müller

This essay examines the nature of pentateuchal redaction, the various positions that scholars have taken on it across the history of modern biblical studies, and the ways that these theories contribute to larger theories of compositional history. It highlights the manner in which redactional theories have been especially productive among continental European scholars over the past half-century. The essay concludes with a consideration of external, empirical evidence for redaction, especially among the Persian and Hellenistic period witnesses to the Pentateuch.


2021 ◽  
Vol 136 (2) ◽  
pp. 102-111
Author(s):  
Karel Davids

Kennisgeschiedenis is in de BMGN nu beter vertegenwoordigd dan dertig jaar geleden. Dat betekent niet dat de toenadering tussen kennisgeschiedenis en algemene geschiedenis in dit tijdschrift al volledig is geslaagd, en evenmin dat alle beschikbare kansen zijn benut. Kennisgeschiedenis is in de BMGN geen mainstream geworden, zo wordt in deze bijdrage betoogd, en de toenadering komt tot nu toe vooral van één kant. De mogelijkheden voor kennishistorisch onderzoek over nationale grenzen heen worden bovendien maar mondjesmaat verkend. De meeste artikelen blijven immers tot één helft van de Lage Landen beperkt. Aan de hand van verschillende voorbeelden wordt geïllustreerd welke interessante connecties en belangwekkende vergelijkingen tussen Noord en Zuid zouden kunnen worden onderzocht. De BMGN zou dus voor de kennisgeschiedenis meer kunnen betekenen dan zij in de afgelopen halve eeuw heeft gedaan. History of knowledge is better represented at the BMGN nowadays than it was thirty years ago. This does not mean that a complete rapprochement between history of knowledge and general history has been accomplished in this journal, nor have all available opportunities been explored. History of knowledge has not become a mainstream school of thought in the BMGN, as is argued in this contribution, and to date the effort at rapprochement has been largely one-sided. Moreover, opportunities for research on history of knowledge beyond national borders are explored in very limited measure. After all, most articles continue to address only one half of the Low Countries. Various examples are presented here to illustrate which interesting connections and impressive comparisons could be examined between North and South. The BMGN could thus have done more to promote history of knowledge than it has in the past half century.


2019 ◽  
pp. 217-224
Author(s):  
Jeremy Prestholdt

Why do particular figures appeal to diverse audiences at specific historical moments? What social roles do icons play in an interfaced world? Tracing the history of global icons over the past half-century demonstrates that the answers to these questions lie not only in the form and connotations of icons, but also in their significant malleability across space and time. Global icons crystallize thought, channel ideas, foster real or imagined linkages, and focus communal energies. They represent imagination beyond the state, political party, or movement. In short, audiences transform iconic figures into the dynamic products of the transnational imagination and collective interpretation. Seemingly timeless, iconic figures symbolize transcendence and communal ideals while remaining malleable. Thus, attraction to icons is not the idolization of the individual per se. Rather, it is the idolization of possibility, of the visions and values that audiences imagine iconic figures to represent.


2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 30-43
Author(s):  
Josh Sides

California—simultaneously celebrated and reviled for its fabled sexual tolerance for the past half-century—has pioneered the use of sexual propositions, ballot initiatives designed to either expand the scope of “obscenity” censorship or to suppress the rights and aspirations of homosexuals. Viewed through the prism of the sexual propositions, the political landscape of California looks quite different than we generally imagine. This article examines the history of these propositions, their financial backers, and the politicians involved with them, including E. Richard Barnes’s Proposition 16, John Briggs’s Proposition 6 (The Briggs Initiative), and William J. “Pete” Knight’s Proposition 22.


Derrida Today ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 178-200
Author(s):  
Christopher Norris

In this essay I set out to place Derrida's work – especially his earlier (pre-1980) books and essays – in the context of related or contrasting developments in analytic philosophy of science over the past half-century. Along the way I challenge the various misconceptions that have grown up around that work, not only amongst its routine detractors in the analytic camp but also amongst some of its less philosophically informed disciples. In particular I focus on the interlinked issues of realism versus anti-realism and the scope and limits of classical (bivalent) logic, both of which receive a detailed, rigorous and sustained treatment in his deconstructive readings of Husserl, Austin and others. Contrary to Derrida's reputation as a exponent of anti-realism in its far-gone ‘textualist’ form and as one who merely plays perverse though ingenious games with logic I show that those readings presuppose both a basically realist conception of their subject-matter and a strong commitment to the protocols of bivalent logic. These he applies with the utmost care and precision right up to the point – unreachable except by way of that procedure – where they encounter certain problems or anomalies that cannot be resolved except by switching to a different (non-bivalent, deviant, paraconsistent, ‘supplementary’, or ‘parergonal’) logic. Philosophy of science in the analytic mainstream might benefit greatly from a closer acquaintance with Derrida's thinking on these topics, as it might from a knowledge of his likewise rigorous thinking-through of the antinomy between structure and genesis as it bears upon issues in the history of scientific thought.


2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen Wood ◽  
Paul Guyer ◽  
Henry E. Allison

People talk about rats deserting a sinking ship, but they don't usually ask where the rats go. Perhaps this is only because the answer is so obvious: of course, most of the rats climb aboard the sounder ships, the ships that ride high in the water despite being laden with rich cargoes of cheese and grain and other things rats love, the ships that bring prosperity to ports like eighteenth-century Königsberg and firms such as Green & Motherby. By making the insulting comparison - as I am in the course of doing – between us Kant scholars and a horde of noxious vermin, my more or less transparent aim is to mitigate, or at least to distract attention from, the collective immodesty of what I am saying about us. For my point is that, in the past half-century or so, Kant studies has become a very prosperous ship indeed. Its success has even been the chief thing that has buoyed all its sister ships in the fleet of modern philosophy, most of which are also doing very well.


Development ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 116 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Salome G. Waelsch

I feel greatly privileged having been asked to talk to you here and I want to begin by thanking the organizers for this invitation. My task of preparing this talk has caused me considerable worry. Obviously, I shall not be able to present here a sound and objective history of embryology over the past 50 years. If nothing else, my great admiration for my close friend Jane Oppenheimer would keep me from being bold enough to step onto her territory, and there have been other serious attempts of an analytical evaluation of embryology during the past half century, e.g. the Nottingham symposium in 1983, published in 1986. What I intend to present here are my personal reflections based on reminiscences over the years during which I had the good fortune of seeing our science develop and of getting to know personally many of the scientists actively involved in the causal analysis of development.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document