Ludwik Fleck and the causative agent of syphilis: sociology or pathology of science? A rejoinder to Jean Lindenmann
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 33 (4):733-750 (2002)
In 1905 two different microbes were proposed to fill the vacant role of etiologic agent for syphilis, one, the Cytorrhyctes luis, by John Siegel, the other, Spirochaeta pallida, by Fritz Schaudinn. After gathering and reviewing the evidence the majority of medical scientists decided in favor of Schaudinn’s candidate. In a previous issue Jean Lindenmann challenged Ludwik Fleck’s suggestion that under suitable social conditions Siegel’s candidate could just as well have won acceptance by the scientific community . To refute this counterfactual thesis, Lindenmann presented an asymmetric account of the dispute over the etiology of syphilis. He adopted the view of the proponents that Schaudinn’s spirochete had already been there in syphilitic lesions for centuries, only awaiting the discovery of an appropriate staining technique to be revealed. Here a more symmetric analysis of the episode will be attempted, paying serious attention to the arguments put forward by the spirochete’s opponents, who expatiated on the many possibilities of inadvertently creating artifacts through microscopic preparation and staining. The symmetric account that is presented in this rejoinder thus aims to trace the simultaneous construction of facts and artifacts. It will not, however, resurrect Fleck’s counterfactual thesis
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
H. Belt (2002). Ludwik Fleck and the Causative Agent of Syphilis: Sociology or Pathology of Science? A Rejoinder to Jean Lindenmann. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 33 (4):733-750.
J. Lindenmann (2002). Siegel, Schaudinn, Fleck and the Etiology of Syphilis: A Response to Henk Van den Belt. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 33 (4):751-752.
Ludwik Fleck (1979). Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. University of Chicago Press.
J. Lindenmann (2001). Siegel, Schaudinn, Fleck and the Etiology of Syphilis. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 32 (3):435-455.
David Stump (1988). The Role of Skill in Experimentation: Reading Ludwik Fleck's Study of the Wasserman Reaction as an Example of Ian Hacking's Experimental Realism. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:302 - 308.
Robert S. Cohen & Thomas Schnelle (1986). Cognition and Fact. Materials on Ludwik Fleck. D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Stig Brorson (2000). Ludwik Fleck on Proto-Ideas in Medicine. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 3 (2):147-152.
Henk van den Belt & Bart Gremmen (1990). Specificity in the Era of Koch and Ehrlich: A Generalized Interpretation of Ludwik Fleck's 'Serological' Thought Style. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 21 (3):463-479.
Eva Hedfors (2006). The Reading of Ludwik Fleck: Questions of Sources and Impetus. Social Epistemology 20 (2):131 – 161.
Markus Seidel (2011). Relativism or Relationism? A Mannheimian Interpretation of Fleck's Claims About Relativism. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 42 (2):219-240.
Kazem Sadegh-Zadeh (1981). World 5 and Medical Knowledge. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 6 (3):263-270.
Henk van den Belt (2011). The Collective Construction of a Scientific Fact: A Re-Examination of the Early Period of the Wassermann Reaction (1906–1912). [REVIEW] Social Epistemology 25 (4):311 - 339.
Claus Zittel (2012). Ludwik Fleck and the Concept of Style in the Natural Sciences. Studies in East European Thought 64 (1-2):53-79.
Stig Brorson & Hanne Andersen (2001). Stabilizing and Changing Phenomenal Worlds: Ludwik Fleck and Thomas Kuhn on Scientific Literature. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 32 (1):109-129.
Nicola Mößner (2011). Thought Styles and Paradigms—a Comparative Study of Ludwik Fleck and Thomas S. Kuhn. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 42 (2):362–371.
Added to index2010-08-30
Total downloads9 ( #223,851 of 1,696,633 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #346,145 of 1,696,633 )
How can I increase my downloads?