Chemical structures are among the trademarks of our profession, as surely chemical as flasks, beakers and distillation columns. When someone sees one of us busily scribbling formulas or structures, he or she has no trouble identifying a chemist. Yet these familiar objects, which accompany our work from start to end, from the initial doodlings (Fig. I) to the final polished artwork in a publication (Fig. II), are deceptively simple. They raise interesting and difficult questions about representation. It is the intent (...) of this article to reflect upon molecular graphics. (shrink)

A major obstacle to chemistry being a deductive science is that its core concepts very often are defined in a circular manner: it is impossible to explain what an acid is without reference to the complementary concept of a base. There are many such dual pairs among the core concepts of chemistry. Such circulation of concepts, rather than an infirmity chemistry is beset with, is seen as a source of vitality and dynamism.

One of the defining features of the modern age is the apotheosis of natural history. Natural History is, of course, the title of Buffon's monumental work, written in the second half of the 18th century. Also, until the rise of the Industrial Revolution, natural history provided an integrated technology, stretching from the voyages of discovery to the establishment of colonies devoted to the cultivation of the resources discovered there, whether one considers sugar cane in its migration west, or vanilla plants (...) on Reunion Island. Beginning in the 16th century, and in such works as Jean de Léry's The Singularities of the French Antarctic, voyagers described, in written accounts of what they saw in far-off lands, exotic substances with singular properties. Jean Nicot returned with tobacco. Parmentier took it upon himself to introduce the cultivation of the potato to France. From both Madame de Sévigné and a secular cantata of Bach we know of the immediate vogue that coffee enjoyed from its introduction in Europe. Later, in the 18th century, after his disastrous expedition to measure the meridian at the equator, La Condamine returned from the Amazon with two substances that would prove crucial to the technical development of the West: rubber and curare. (shrink)

Aujourd’hui, les scientifiques sont au moins trilingues : langue maternelle ; langage technique de la discipline ; anglais comme langue véhiculaire. Le plurilinguisme est indispensable à un scientifique parce que la science est inséparable de sa communication, sous ses différents registres, notamment ceux de l’écrit et de l’oral. Il n’est pas de science, en particulier, sans vulgarisation scientifique : en ce sens, être un scientifique, c’est apprendre à traduire la parole des choses. Le monolinguisme, en la matière, n’est pas seulement (...) néfaste : c’est une vue de l’esprit, car les concepts, que ce soit dans les sciences exactes ou les sciences humaines, ne sauraient s’appréhender directement, sans le recours au langage. Lavoisier considérait que les langues étaient « de véritables méthodes analytiques » et, à l’inverse, que « la logique des sciences tient essentiellement à leur langue ». Voilà pourquoi il est bien artificiel d’opposer sciences exactes, sciences humaines et esthétique : il n’y a pas de fossé infranchissable entre les trois, et il est urgent de le redécouvrir.Scientists today are trilingual at least: they have their mother tongue, the technical language of their discipline and English as their vehicular language. Multilingualism is essential to a scientist because science is inseparable from communication in all its different registers, and particularly those of written and oral language. Every kind science of goes hand in hand with scientific popularisation: in this sense, being a scientist means learning to translate what things - rather than people - are saying. Speaking only one language, in this context, is not just a disadvantage: it is an illusion, because concepts, whether in the exact or the human sciences, cannot be grasped directly without the use of language. Lavoisier believed that languages are “analytical methods per se” and that, conversely, “the logic of the sciences essentially lies in their language”. This is why the division between exact sciences, liberal arts and aesthetics is completely artificial: there is no real gap between the three, and we urgently need to rediscover this fact. (shrink)