On Heroes and Fools in Science
In the conventional model of scientific "progress", we begin in superstitious ignorance and
move toward final truth by the successive accumulation of facts. In this smug perspective,the
history of science contains little more than anecdotal interest --for it can only chronicle
past errors
and credit the bricklayers for discerning glimpses of final truth. It is as transparent as an old-
fashioned melodrama: truth (as we perceive it today) is the only arbiter and the world of past
scientists is divided into good guys who were right and bad guys who were wrong.
Historians of science have utterly discredited this model during the past decade. Science is not
a heartless pursuit of objective information. It is a creative human activity, its geniuses
acting more as artists than as information processors. Changes in theory are not simply the
derivative results of
new discoveries but the work of creative imagination infulenced by contemporary social and politica
forces. We should not judge the past through anachronistic spectacles of our own convictions --
designaating as heroes the scientists whom we judge to be right by criteria that had nothing to do
with their own concerns. We are simply foolish if we call Anaximander (six century BC) an
evolutionist because, in advocating a primary role for water among the four elements, he held that
life first inhabited the sea; yet most textbooks so credit him.
move toward final truth by the successive accumulation of facts. In this smug perspective,the
history of science contains little more than anecdotal interest --for it can only chronicle
past errors
and credit the bricklayers for discerning glimpses of final truth. It is as transparent as an old-
fashioned melodrama: truth (as we perceive it today) is the only arbiter and the world of past
scientists is divided into good guys who were right and bad guys who were wrong.
Historians of science have utterly discredited this model during the past decade. Science is not
a heartless pursuit of objective information. It is a creative human activity, its geniuses
acting more as artists than as information processors. Changes in theory are not simply the
derivative results of
new discoveries but the work of creative imagination infulenced by contemporary social and politica
forces. We should not judge the past through anachronistic spectacles of our own convictions --
designaating as heroes the scientists whom we judge to be right by criteria that had nothing to do
with their own concerns. We are simply foolish if we call Anaximander (six century BC) an
evolutionist because, in advocating a primary role for water among the four elements, he held that
life first inhabited the sea; yet most textbooks so credit him.
上一篇:Xiaolongbao
声明:以上文章均为用户自行添加,仅供打字交流使用,不代表本站观点,本站不承担任何法律责任,特此声明!如果有侵犯到您的权利,请及时联系我们删除。
文章热度:☆☆☆☆☆
文章难度:☆☆☆☆☆
文章质量:☆☆☆☆☆
说明:系统根据文章的热度、难度、质量自动认证,已认证的文章将参与打字排名!
本文打字排名TOP20
登录后可见
用户更多文章推荐
- BBC WORLD NEWS 201301012020-01-28
- 游泳的12大好处,看完彻底服了~2019-08-21
- The year in Melania2018-01-20
- Young Voters Could Again Play2012-10-07
- Deep-fried rice cake2012-10-07
- Baked sweet potato2012-10-07
- Tofu flower soup2012-10-07
- Perfect place to power lunch2012-09-25
- Rice ball2012-09-25
- Crab shell pie2012-09-24
- Xiaolongbao2012-09-24
- Athens, the Eye of Greece2012-09-22