Annals of Science 32 (3):245-256 (1975)

While many aspects of Shapin's historical thesis are accepted, this paper raises objections to specific parts of his historical account, and also to the historiographical assumptions underlying his sociological programme. In particular, Shapin's claim to have explained the Edinburgh phrenology debate in social terms is analysed and rejected
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/00033797500200271
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,587
External links

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 System of Phrenology.George Combe - 1825 - Wentworth Press.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Foundations of Social Epistemics.Alvin I. Goldman - 1987 - Synthese 73 (1):109 - 144.
Against Epistemological Relativism.Frans Gregersen - 1988 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 19 (4):447.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Edinburgh Phrenology Debate: 1803–1828.G. N. Cantor - 1975 - Annals of Science 32 (3):195-218.
Social Critique in the Totally Socialized Society.Matthias Benzer - 2011 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 37 (5):575-603.
The Manhattan Project and Its Long Shadow.Joseph Agassi - 2011 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 41 (4):574-595.


Added to PP index

Total views
27 ( #411,185 of 2,461,959 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #448,803 of 2,461,959 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes