Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Complementarity Between the Collective and the Individual

Rosenfeld and Cold War History of Science

  • Published:
Minerva Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Besides his activities as a theoretical physicist, the Belgian Léon Rosenfeld cultivated and showed a lively concern for history of science since his student years. This paper is a study of his publications, correspondence and other endeavours in history of science, mainly during the early Cold War period, in order to explore his essentially Marxist views on science and society and how they differed from those of other Marxists scholars, most notably John D. Bernal and Boris Hessen.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Niels Bohr Archive, Copenhagen, Rosenfeld Papers (hereafter RP) folder ‘Utrecht 1940–47’: ‘Political 1945–47’, ‘Lettres de Hollande’ in the Brussels journal L’Éclair, October–December, 1945 and January 1946. ‘Letters to the editor’, Manchester Guardian, August–September, 1947. J.G. Crowther Archive (Brighton), University of Sussex Library, Special Collections (hereafter JGCA), Rosenfeld to Crowther, 31 October 1945.

  2. RP folder ‘Histoire des sciences, etc. 1940–1947 (Utrecht): Crowther’, Crowther to Rosenfeld, London 30 September 1945. Rosenfeld to Crowther, op. cit. note 1.

  3. RP, folder ‘World Federation of Scientific Workers (1947–55)’, Crowther to Rosenfeld, London, 4 October 1948. Copyright University of Sussex, England. I return to the Commission on the History of the Social Relations of Science below.

  4. For example (Mach 1896).

  5. (Rosenfeld 1938; 1979[1947]; 1979[1952]; 1953).

  6. Prompted by Gunther S. Stent’s concept of prematurity in scientific discovery from the early 1970s, remarkably similar historiographical considerations have recently been taken up anew (Hook 2002).

  7. It is beyond the scope of this paper to compare Rosenfeld and Bohm scientifically and politically in greater detail since the focus here is on history of science. Indeed, such a comparison between Bohm and Rosenfeld would make a paper in itself. However, at first sight their irreconcilability seems to stem first and foremost from their opposite alignment in the controversy about the interpretation of quantum mechanics.

  8. See also the Niels Bohr Archive (Copenhagen), Bohr General Correspondence, Rosenfeld to Bohr, 14 October 1958.

  9. [Allgemeiner ist die Ideologie einer fortschrittlichen Klasse, die ihre Stellung gegenüber der Aussenwelt mit Zuversicht betrachtet, grundsätzlich materialistisch (obgleich oft in scheinbar idealistischer Form verkleidet); eine verfallende Klasse sucht eine Zuflucht von einer als feindlich empfundenen Welt in idealistische Vorstellungen.] Rosenfeld to Pauli, Manchester, 6 April 1952.

  10. The Niels Bohr Archive (Copenhagen), Bohr Scientific Correspondence, Rosenfeld to Bohr, Utrecht, 1 February, 1947.

  11. Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis (Amsterdam), J.M. Burgers, manuscript ‘Concerning the study of the history of science in past and future’ enclosed in letter to Rosenfeld, 23 January 1947. Rosenfeld to Burgers, Utrecht, 1 February 1947.

  12. JGCA, Rosenfeld to Crowther, 14 September 1945. Reprinted with the permission of A. and J.L.J. Rosenfeld.

  13. (Hessen 1971[1931]; Chilvers 2003; Schaffer 1984; Mayer 2004; Werskey 1988, pp. 138–149, 250–251).

  14. (Hessen 1971[1931], pp. 199−201; Rosenfeld 1979[1941]; 1979[1948]; 1979[1952]).

  15. RP, folder ‘British Society for the History of Science (1948–59)’, Crowther to Rosenfeld, London, 9 March 1948.

  16. Vidar Enebakk (2006) provides an institutional context of the commission.

  17. RP folder ‘History of Science 1’: ‘Histoire des sciences, etc., 1940–1947 (Utrecht)’, Armando Cortesau to Rosenfeld, Paris, 8 October, 1946. In folder ‘History of Science 3’: ‘Union International d’Histoire des Sciences. Commission for the History of the Social Relations of Science (1946–56)’, Rosenfeld to Cortesao, Utrecht, 23 October, 1946.

  18. See also RP folder ‘History of Science 3’: ‘Union International d’Histoire des Sciences. Commission for the History of the Social Relations of Science (1946–56)’, Rosenfeld to Cortesao, Utrecht, 23 October, 1946.

  19. For more about Lilley and the Centaurus collection of papers see Enebakk op. cit. note 16.

  20. (Cantor 1997, p. 21; Ravetz 1981, p. 396; Guerlac 1963, p. 810; Mayer 2004, p. 61; Shapin 1992, p. 339).

  21. See also Rosenfeld (1954) and Macrae (1954).

  22. RP, folder ‘History of Science 1: Review of Bernal’s Science in History (1955–56)’, Gordon Scharffe to Rosenfeld, 8 December 1954.

  23. RP, folder ‘Review of Bernal’, Gordon Scharffe to Rosenfeld, 8 December 1954 and London, 8 December 1955.

  24. RP, folder ‘Review of Bernal’, Bernal to Rosenfeld 15 March 1956. Cambridge University Library (Cambridge), Bernal Papers (hereafter BP), Rosenfeld to Bernal, 20 March 1956.

  25. BP, Bernal to Claude Morgan, 21 December 1955.

  26. RP folder ‘Review of Bernal’, Bernal to Rosenfeld, Birkbeck College, 15 December 1955.

  27. BP, Bernal to P. Biquard, 16 December 1955. Biquard to Bernal 19 December 1955. Bernal to Claude Morgan, 21 December 1955.

  28. RP, folder ‘Review of Bernal’, Gordon Scharffe to Rosenfeld, Kingston, 1 March 1956. BP, Rosenfeld to Bernal, Manchester, 12 March 1956.

  29. RP folder ‘Review of Bernal’, Bernal to Rosenfeld, Birkbeck College, 15 March 1956.

  30. RP folder ‘Review of Bernal’, Crowther to Rosenfeld, London, 17 December 1955. Farrington to Rosenfeld, Swansea, 5 January 1956. Polanyi to Rosenfeld, Manchester 8 December 1955. Archibald Clow to Rosenfeld, London, 6 January 1956. Dorothea Waley Singer to Rosenfeld, Kilmarth, 15 December 1955. In folder ‘History of Science’: ‘C. and D. Singer 1947–53’, Dorothea Waley Singer to Rosenfeld, Cornwall, 29 April, 1955.

  31. RP folder ‘Review of Bernal’, Farrington to Rosenfeld, Swansea, 5 January 1956.

  32. RP folder ‘Review of Bernal’. Farrington to Rosenfeld, Swansea 18 January 1956.

  33. See also Enebakk (2006).

  34. (Mayer 2000, 2004; Schaffer 1984; Shapin 1992). See also Enebakk (2006).

  35. RP folder ‘History of Science 1’: ‘Correspondance générale 1952–58 (Manchester) [Lilley (1948–59)]’.

  36. RP, “History of Science”.

  37. RP, ”Rosenfeld correspondence 1969–1971”: Rosenfeld to Gerald Holton, 14 November 1969. Rosenfeld to Martin J. Klein, 8 January 1970. “Rosenfeld correspondence 1971–1974”: Rosenfeld to R.A. Lester, 8 May 1973.

  38. To the best of my knowledge, Rosenfeld regrettably never commented on this paper.

References

  • Aaserud, Finn. 1990. Redirecting science: Niels Bohr, philanthropy and the rise of nuclear physics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beller, Mara. 1999. Quantum dialogue: The making of a revolution. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernal, John D. 1954. Science in history. London: Watts & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bustamente, Martha C. 1997. Jacques Solomon (1908–1942): Profil d’un physicien théoricien dans la France des années trente. Revue d’histoire des sciences et de leurs applications 50(1–2): 49–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantor, Geoffrey. 1997. Presidential address: Charles Singer and the early years of the British Society for the History of Science. British Journal for the History of Science 30: 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chilvers, Christopher A.J. 2003. The dilemmas of seditious men: The Crowther-Hessen correspondence in the 1930s. British Journal for the History of Science 36(4): 417–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chilvers, Christopher A.J. 2006. La signification historique de Boris Hessen. In Les Racines Sociales et Èconomiques des Principia de Newton, translated and commented by Serge Guérout, 179–206. Paris: Vuibert.

  • Cohen, Robert S., and John Stachel. 1979. Bibliography of the writings of Léon Rosenfeld. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 911–921, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

  • Dingle, Herbert. 1954. Social conditions and the development of science. Review of Essays on the Social History of Science (Lilley 1953a). Nature 173: 791–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elzinga, Aant. 1996a. Introduction: Models of Internationalism. In Internationalism and Science, ed. Aant Elzinga and Catharina Landström, 3–20. London: Taylor Graham.

  • Elzinga, Aant. 1996b. Unesco and the Politics of Scientific Internationalism. In Internationalism and Science, ed. Aant Elzinga and Catharina Landström, 89–131. London: Taylor Graham.

  • Enebackk, Vidar. 2006. The history of science and its social relations: UNESCO and the history of science 1945–1950. Paper presented at the conference Sciences and Social Commitment, Sept. 15–17, London: Science Museum.

  • Forman, Paul. 1971. Weimar culture, causality, and quantum theory, 1918–1927: Adaptation by German Physicists and Mathematicians to a hostile intellectual environment. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 3: 1–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forstner, Christian. 2008. The early history of David Bohm’s quantum mechanics through the perspective of Ludwik Fleck’s Thought-Collectives. Minerva 46(2) this volume.

  • Freire, Jr., Olival. 2005. Science and exile: David Bohm, the cold war, and a new interpretation of quantum mechanics. Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences 36: 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, Loren. 1985. The socio-political roots of Boris Hessen: Soviet Marxism and the history of science. Social Studies of Science 15: 705–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerlac, Henry. 1963. Some historical assumptions of the history of science. In Scientific change, ed. Alistair C. Crombie, 797–812. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heisenberg, Werner. 1971[1948]. Begriff ‘abgeschlossene Theorie’ in der modernen Naturwissenschaft. In Schritte über Grenzen. Gesammelte Reden und Aufsätze, Werner Heisenberg, 87–94. München: R. Piper & Co. (Originally published in Dialectica 2).

  • Hessen, Boris. 1971[1931]. The social and economic roots of Newton’s ‘Principia’. In Science at the cross roads, ed. Nicolai I. Bukharin, 147–212. London: Frank Cass & Co.

  • Hook, Ernest B. (ed.). 2002. Prematurity in scientific discovery: On resistance and neglect. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horner, David. 1996. The Cold War and the Politics of Scientific Internationalism: The Post-War Formation and Development of the World Federation of Scientific Workers 1946–1956. In Internationalism and science, ed. Aant Elzinga and Catharina Landström, 132–161. London: Taylor Graham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen, Anja Skaar. 2003. Hans Christian Ørsted’s Chemical Philosophy. In Ørsted’s Theory of Force. An unpublished textbook in dynamical chemistry, ed. Anja Skaar Jacobsen, Andrew D. Jackson, Karen Jelved, and Helge Kragh, vii–xxxii. Historisk-filosofiske Meddelelser, vol. 86. Copenhagen: The Royal Danish Academy of Sciences.

  • Jacobsen, Anja Skaar. 2006. Propagating dynamical science in the periphery of German Naturphilosophie: H. C. Ørsted’s Textbooks and Didactics. Science and Education 15(7–8): 739–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen, Anja Skaar. 2007. Léon Rosenfeld’s Marxist defense of complementarity. Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences 37 supplement: 3–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lilley, Samuel. ed. 1953a. Essays on the social history of science. Centaurus 3(1–2).

  • Lilley, Samuel. 1953b. Cause and Effect in the History of Science. Centaurus 3(1–2): 58–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mach, Ernst. 1896. Die Principien der Wärmelehre. Historisch-Kritisch Entwickelt. Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macrae, Donald G. 1954. Review of Essays on the social history of science. The Political Quarterly 25(3): 278–280. (Edited by Samuel Lilley.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, Anna K. 2000. Setting up a discipline: Conflicting agendas of the Cambridge History of Science Committee, 1936–1950. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 31: 665–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, Anna K. 2004. Setting up a discipline, II: British history of science and ‘the end of ideology’, 1931–1948. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 35: 41–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ørsted, Hans Christian. 1852. Noget om Hegelianernes Philosophi (Something about the philosophy of the Hegelians). In Samlede og efterladte Skrifter af H.C. Ørsted (Collected and left papers by H.C. Ørsted), 75–77, vol. 9. Copenhagen: Høst.

  • Ravetz, Jerome R. 1981. Bernal’s Marxist vision of history. Isis 72: 393–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1932]. Marcus Marci’s Investigations of the Prism and Their Relation to Newton’s Theory of Color. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 49–54, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Originally published in German in Isis 17: 325–330).

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1938. Remarques sur la question des précurseurs. Archeion 21: 74–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1941]. The genesis of the laws of thermodynamics. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 99–111, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Originally published in French in Bulletin de l’Académie royale de Belgique 10: 199–212).

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1947]. On the method of history of science. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 3–6, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Originally published in Archives Internationale d’Histoire des Sciences 1, 1–6).

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1948]. The organization of scientific research. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 50–60, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Originally published in French in L’organisation de la recherche scientifique (Hommage national à Paul Langevin et Jean Perrin, Paris)).

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1952]. Joule’s scientific outlook. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 112–122, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Originally published in Bulletin of the British Society for the History of Science 1: 169–176).

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1953]. Strife about complementarity. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 466–471, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Originally published in Science Progress 163: 393–410).

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1953. Introduction to essays on the social history of science. Centaurus 3(1–2): 7–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1954. Response to Herbert Dingle’s review (Dingle 1954). Nature 173: 1102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1956]a. The velocity of light and electrodynamics. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 134–177, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Originally published in Supplement Nuovo Cimento 4: 1630–1669).

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1956]b. Review of J.D. Bernal, Science in History. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 7–15, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Originally published in Centaurus 4: 285–296).

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1955–56. Review of A. Rupert Hall’s The scientific revolution 1500–1800 (1954). Centaurus 4: 171–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1959]. Jacques Solomon. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 297–301, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Originally published in French in A la mémoire de 15 savants français assassinés par les Allemands 1940–1945 (Paris: Comité à la mémoire des savants français victimes de la barbarie allemande 1940–1945)).

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1963. Interview by Thomas Kuhn & John Heilbron, 1 July 1963, Sources for the History of Quantum Physics Oral History Interviews, the Niels Bohr Archive, Copenhagen.

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1968]. The method of physics. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 614–636, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Originally published by Unesco).

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1969]. Flicker in the Darkness. Review of M. Clagett (ed.), Nicole Oresme and the Medieval Geometry of Qualities and Motions. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 45–48, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Original published in Nature 222: 197).

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1970]. The Evolution of Oersted’s Scientific Concepts. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 178–192, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Originally published in French in Oversigt over Det Kogenlige. Danske Videdenskabernes Selskab: 1–17).

  • Rosenfeld, Léon. 1979[1971]. Social and Individual Aspects of the Development of Science. In Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld, ed. Robert S. Cohen and John Stachel, 902–910, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 21. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. (Originally published in Danish in Fysisk Tidsskrift 69 (4–5): 97–106).

  • Schaffer, Simon. 1984. Newton at the crossroads. Radical Philosophy 37: 23–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapin, Steven. 1992. Discipline and bounding: The history and sociology of science as seen through the externalism–internalism debate. History of Science 30: 333–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Meyenn, Karl. (ed.). 2001. Wolfgang Pauli. Scientific correspondence with Bohr, Einstein, Heisenberg, a.o., 4 vols., vol. 4, Part 1. Berlin: Springer.

  • Werskey, Gary. 1988. The visible college: A collective biography of british scientists and socialists of the 1930s, 2nd ed. London: Free Associations Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, L. Pearce. (1957). Review of J.D. Bernal, Science in History. Isis 48: 471–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Danish Research Council for the Humanities. For permission to consult and quote from manuscripts and correspondence I am indebted to Andrée and Jean L.J. Rosenfeld and the Niels Bohr Archive, Rosenfeld Papers; the Niels Bohr Archive (Copenhagen), Bohr Scientific and General Correspondence; Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis (International Institute of Social History) (Amsterdam), Burgers Papers; J.G. Crowther Archive (Brighton), University of Sussex Library, Special Collections, and Cambridge University Library (Cambridge), Bernal Papers. I want to thank Vidar Enebakk for permission to refer to an unpublished manuscript of his and two anonymous referees for their suggestions to improve a preliminary version of the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Niels Bohr Archive, Blegdamsvej 17, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Anja Skaar Jacobsen

Authors
  1. Anja Skaar Jacobsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anja Skaar Jacobsen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jacobsen, A.S. The Complementarity Between the Collective and the Individual. Minerva 46, 195–214 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-008-9091-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-008-9091-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation