Ludwik Fleck and History of Science: ‘thought collective’ and ‘thought style’

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
pp. 215-243
Author(s):  
Chungki Song
2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
DEBORAH R. COEN

Bilingualism was Kuhn's solution to the problem of relativism, the problem raised by his own theory of incommensurability. In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, he argued that scientific theories are separated by gulfs of mutual incomprehension. There is no neutral ground from which to judge one theory fitter than another. Each is formulated in its own language and cannot be translated into the idiom of another. Yet, like many Americans, Kuhn never had the experience of moving comfortably between languages. “I've never been any good really at foreign languages,” he admitted in an interview soon before his death. “I can read French, I can read German, if I'm dropped into one of those countries I can stammer along for a while, but my command of foreign languages is not good, and never has been, which makes it somewhat ironic that much of my thought these days goes to language.” Kuhn may have been confessing to more than a personal weakness. His linguistic ineptitude seems to be a clue to his overweening emphasis on the difficulty of “transworld travel.” Multilingualism remained for him an abstraction. In this respect, I will argue, Kuhn engendered a peculiarly American turn in the history of science. Kuhn's argument for the dependence of science on the norms of particular communities has been central to the development of studies of science in and as culture since the 1980s. Recent work on the mutual construction of science and nationalism, for instance, is undeniably in Kuhn's debt. Nonetheless, the Kuhnian revolution cut off other avenues of research. In this essay, I draw on the counterexample of the physician–historian Ludwik Fleck, as well as on critiques by Steve Fuller and Ted Porter, to suggest one way to situate Kuhn within the broader history of the history of science. To echo Kuhn's own visual metaphors, one of the profound effects of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions on the field of history of science was to render certain modes of knowledge production virtually invisible.


2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 19-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Uroš Matić

Abstract The process of epistemological de-colonization of the historiography and archaeology of ancient Egypt and Nubia has begun unfolding only in the last two decades. It is still set in the context of descriptive disciplinary history with little reflection on and criticism of background theories and methods. As a consequence, some of the old approaches and concepts live on in the discipline. Utilizing the concepts of “thought collective” and “thought style” (sensu Ludwik Fleck) this paper analyzes previous works on ancient Egypt and Nubia written in the colonial discourse. Three key ideas run like threads through these works: 1. scientific racism, 2. socio-cultural evolution, and 3. colonial and imperial discourse. In this paper the emphasis will be put on scientific racism, its development, and its remnants in the archaeology and historiography of Egypt and Nubia.


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 503-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Warwick Anderson

AbstractThis article offers an overview of science and technology studies (STS) in Southeast Asia, focusing particularly on historical formations of science, technology, and medicine in the region, loosely defined, though research using social science approaches comes within its scope. I ask whether we are fashioning an “autonomous” history of science in Southeast Asia—and whether this would be enough. Perhaps we need to explore further “Southeast Asia as method,” a thought style heralded here though remaining, I hope, productively ambiguous. This review contributes primarily to the development of postcolonial intellectual history in Southeast Asia and secondarily to our understanding of the globalization and embedding of science, technology, and medicine.


2001 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Roy Weintraub

While most scientists and philosophers of science privilege scientific knowledge, and have sought demarcations of science from non-science to justify the privilege, sociologists of science, small numbers of philosophers of science, anthropologists, and some scientists themselves have been attracted to a new way of talking about science. Prefigured by Ludwik Fleck (1935/1979) and Gaston Bachelard (1934/1984), nurtured by the controversies over Thomas Kuhn's work, and instantiated in the Edinburgh School's Strong Program, the naturalistic turn portrays science as a human activity, part of the woof and warp of culture itself. Yet curiously historians of science have been less involved in this recent reconceptualization of both science and scientific knowledge.


Archivaria ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 104-147
Author(s):  
Bethany G. Anderson

Computational approaches to archives present archivists and users with new ways of engaging with records and their provenance. Such approaches are particularly useful for scientific archives due to the collective and collaborative nature of modern scientific knowledge production. This article explores computational approaches to digitized fonds of scientists involved in the transdisciplinary scientific movement cybernetics through the Cybernetics Thought Collective: A History of Science and Technology Portal Project as a means to reveal the ways cyberneticians have developed concepts and debated ideas through the creation and exchange of correspondence and other records. The project has experimented with machine-learning and natural-language-processing tools to generate data from the materials in an effort to reveal connections between the cyberneticians and their correspondence. Cybernetics seeks to understand the human condition through experiments with machines, and, in a cybernetically inspired sense, so too do archivists seek to understand their archives through experiments with machines. Such explorations are important for documenting scientific thought collectives like cybernetics in a digital age.


Idei ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 18-28
Author(s):  
Олег Шепетяк ◽  
Оксана Шепетяк

Ludwik Fleck is a philosopher, biologist and physician who had a decisive influence on Thomas Kuhn. The research is dedicated to a publication of the Ukrainian translation of the Fleck’smain work “Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact” by Stefania Ptashnyk. The article deals with the scientific formation of Fleck, describes what happened to his philosophical achievements after his death and the outbreak of his popularity. The article presents the content of all Fleck’s works on philosophy, which are divided into three periods: preparatory, major and post-war. The main emphasis is on the formation of the key concepts of Fleck’s philosophy: “thought style” and “thought collective”.


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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document