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 A 34 (3):647-659 (2003)
This paper defends the right of historians to make use of their knowledge of the remote consequences of past actions. In particular, it is argued that the disciplinary cohesion of the history of science relies crucially upon our ability to target, for further investigation, those past activities ancestral to modern science. The history of science is not limited to the study of those activities but it is structured around them. In this sense, the discipline is inherently 'present-centred': its boundaries are determined, in part, by judgements inaccessible to the historical actors. Present-centredness of this sort, it is urged, should not be regarded as a problem; its methodological consequences are minimal.
|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
A. Cunningham (2001). A Reply to Peter Dear's 'Religion, Science and Natural Philosophy: Thoughts on Cunningham's Thesis'. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 32 (2):387-391.
Andrew Cunningham (1988). Getting the Game Right: Some Plain Words on the Identity and Invention of Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 19 (3):365-389.
Nicholas Jardine (2003). Whigs and Stories: Herbert Butterfield and the Historiography of Science. History of Science 41:125--40.
K. R. Minogue (1981). Method in Intellectual History: Quentin Skinner's Foundations. Philosophy 56 (218):533 - 552.
Quentin Skinner (1974). Some Problems in the Analysis of Political Thought and Action. Political Theory 2 (3):277-303.
Citations of this work BETA
Oscar Moro Abadía (2011). Hermeneutical Contributions to the History of Science: Gadamer on 'Presentism'. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 42 (2):372-380.
N. Tosh (2006). Science, Truth and History, Part I. Historiography, Relativism and the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37 (4):675-701.
Similar books and articles
R. Cabral (1996). Herbert Butterfield (1900-79) as a Christian Historian of Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 27 (4):547-564.
Paul A. Roth (2008). Varieties and Vagaries of Historical Explanation. Journal of the Philosophy of History 2 (2):214-226.
Klaus Hentschel (2003). Der Vergleich AlS Brücke Zwischen Wissenschaftsgeschichte Und Wissenschaftstheorie. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 34 (2):251-275.
Leon J. Goldstein (1967). Theory in History. Philosophy of Science 34 (1):23-40.
Selman Halabi (2005). A Useful Anachronism: John Locke, the Corpuscular Philosophy, and Inference to the Best Explanation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 36 (2):241-259.
Cassandra Pinnick & George Gale (2000). Philosophy of Science and History of Science: A Troubling Interaction. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 31 (1):109-125.
Michel Janssen (2002). COI Stories: Explanation and Evidence in the History of Science. Perspectives on Science 10 (4):457-522.
N. Tosh (2002). Possession, Exorcism and Psychoanalysis. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 33 (4):583-596.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads12 ( #137,846 of 1,140,268 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #142,694 of 1,140,268 )
How can I increase my downloads?