The Pitfalls and Possibilities of Following Koyré: The Younger Tom Kuhn, “Critical Historian,” on Tradition Dynamics and Big History

Chapter

Abstract

Late in his career, Thomas S. Kuhn practiced more as a philosopher of science than as a historian of science. However, his earlier work—leading up to TheStructure of Scientific Revolutions and during the majority of his tenure in the Princeton history of science group—focused on “mapping” the shape of the history of the physical sciences and on modeling the dynamics, or “motor,” of scientific traditions. This paper examines the younger Kuhn’s excursions in map and motor design. It views Kuhn as a “critical historian,” that is, a historian who constructs explanatory categories in order to apply them to large-scale narratives, evaluation of which can suggest modification of those guiding categories.

The younger Kuhn’s map and motor design was largely shaped by the work of his historiographical idol, Alexandre Koyré. Kuhn’s creative articulation of Koyré’s position explains his innovations concerning Scientific Revolutions (plural), his loosening of Koyré’s central category of “metaphysics,” and his invention of the crucial conception of “normal science.” Additionally, Kuhn’s devotion to Koyré explains some historiographical pitfalls and blind spots that bedeviled his historical work: for example, his ignoring early modern natural philosophizing as an institution and culture in its own right and his failure to capitalize on his correct insight into the nature of scientific discovery as the nonrevolutionary yet tradition-modifying core process in the sciences. The paper is concerned with Kuhn’s work as a critical historian and his legacy for younger historians, not with philosophical debates about his texts.

Keywords

Thomas S. Kuhn Alexandre Koyré The Scientific Revolution Discovery Historiography of science Kuhnian normal science Kuhnian revolutionary science Metaphysics of science Experimental sciences Sociology of scientific knowledge Internalist/externalist debate 

References

  1. Bachelard G (1949) Le rationalisme appliqué. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris.Google Scholar
  2. Bachelard G (1938) La Formation de l’Esprit Scientifique. Vrin, Paris.Google Scholar
  3. Barnes B (1972) Sociological Explanation and Natural Science: A Kuhnian Reappraisal. Archives Européennes de sociologie 13:373–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnes B (1974) Scientific Knowledge and Sociological Theory. Routledge & Kegan, London.Google Scholar
  5. Barnes B (1982) T. S. Kuhn and Social Science. MacMillan, London.Google Scholar
  6. Collins HM (1975) The Seven Sexes: A Study in the Sociology of a Phenomenon. Sociology 9:205–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cunningham A (1988) Getting the Game Right: Some Plain Words on the Identity and Invention of Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 19:365–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cunningham A (1991) How the Principia got its Name. Or, Taking Natural Philosophy Seriously. History of Science 24:377–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cunningham A, Williams P (1993) De–Centring the ‘Big Picture’: The Origins of Modern Science and the Modern Origins of Science. British Journal for the History of Science 26:407–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dear P (2001) Religion, Science and Natural Philosophy: Thoughts on Cunningham’s Thesis. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 32:377–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Easlea B (1980) Witch–Hunting, Magic and the New Philosophy: An Introduction to the Debates of the Scientific Revolution 1450–1750. Harvester Press, Sussex.Google Scholar
  12. Hanson NR (1958) Patterns of Discovery. The Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  13. Harrison P (2000) The Influence of Cartesian Cosmology in England. In Gaukroger S, Schuster J, Sutton J (eds). Descartes’ Natural Philosophy. Routledge, London, pp. 168–192.Google Scholar
  14. Harrison P (2002) Voluntarism and Early Modern Science. History of Science 40:63–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jacobs S (2009) Thomas Kuhn’s Memory. Intellectual History Review 19/1:83–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. King MD (1971) Reasons, Tradition and the Progressiveness of Science. History and Theory 10:3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Koyré A (1939) Études Galiléennes. Hermann, Paris. English. [Koyré A (1978) Galileo Studies. The Harvester–Hassocks, Sussex].Google Scholar
  18. Koyré A (1956) The Origins of Modern Science. Diogenes 16:1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Koyré A (1955) A Documentary History of the Problem of Fall from Kepler to Newton. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 45/4:329–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Koyré A (1973). The Astronomical Revolution. Methuen, London. [From: original French Edition 1961]Google Scholar
  21. Kuhn TS (1957) The Copernican Revolution. Vintage, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Kuhn TS (1963) The Function of Dogma in Scientific Research. In Crombie AC (ed). Scientific Change. Heineman, London, pp. 347–369.Google Scholar
  23. Kuhn TS (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd edition. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  24. Kuhn TS (1977a) The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  25. Kuhn TS (1977b) The Relations between the History and the Philosophy of Science. In Kuhn 1977a, pp. 3–20.Google Scholar
  26. Kuhn TS (1977c) Mathematical versus Experimental Traditions in the Development of Physical Science. In Kuhn 1977a, pp. 31–65.Google Scholar
  27. Kuhn TS (1977d) Energy Conservation as an Example of Simultaneous Discovery. In Kuhn 1977a, pp. 66–104.Google Scholar
  28. Kuhn TS (1977e) The History of Science. In Kuhn 1977a, pp. 105–126.Google Scholar
  29. Kuhn TS (1977f) The Relations between History and the History of Science. In Kuhn 1977a, pp. 127–161.Google Scholar
  30. Kuhn TS (1977g) The Historical Structure of Scientific Discovery. In Kuhn 1977a, pp. 165–177.Google Scholar
  31. Kuhn TS (1977h) The Function of Measurement in Modern Physical Science. In Kuhn 1977a, pp. 178–224.Google Scholar
  32. Kuhn TS (1977i) A Function for Thought Experiments. In Kuhn 1977a, pp. 240–265.Google Scholar
  33. Kuhn TS (2000) The Trouble with the Historical Philosophy of Science. In Conant J, Haugeland J (eds). The Road Since Structure. Thomas S. Kuhn. Philosophical Essays, 1970–1993, with an Autobiographical Interview. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 105–120.Google Scholar
  34. Lakatos I, Musgrave A (1970) (eds) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  35. Lenoble R (1943) Mersenne ou la naissance du mécanisme. Vrin, Paris.Google Scholar
  36. Merton RK (1970) Science, Technology and Society in Seventeenth Century England. Harper & Row, New York. [Original publication in: Merton RK 1938, Science, technology, and society in seventeenth-century England. Osiris 4:360–632].Google Scholar
  37. Mulkay M (1979) Science and the Sociology of Knowledge. Allen & Unwin, London.Google Scholar
  38. Pinch T (1985) Towards an Analysis of Scientific Observation: the Externality and Evidential Significance of Observational Reports in Physics. Social Studies of Science 15:3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Polanyi M (1958) Personal Knowledge: Toward a Post-Critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  40. Popper KR (1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Basic Books, London.Google Scholar
  41. Rabb TK (1975) The Struggle for Stability in Early Modern Europe. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  42. Rattansi PM (1964) The Helmontian-Galenist Controversy in Seventeenth Century England. Ambix 12:1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ravetz JR (1971) Scientific Knowledge and its Social Problems. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  44. Ravetz JR (1975) Entry: Science, History of. Encyclopedia Britannica. 15th edition. Vol. 16. pp. 366–372.Google Scholar
  45. Schuster JA (1979) Kuhn and Lakatos Revisited. British Journal for the History of Science 12:301–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schuster JA (1986) Cartesian Method as Mythic Speech: A Diachronic and Structural Analysis. In Schuster JA, Yeo RR (eds). The Politics and Rhetoric of Scientific Method. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 33–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schuster JA (1990) The Scientific Revolution. In Olby RC, Cantor GN, Christie JRR, Hodge MJS (eds). The Companion to the History of Modern Science. Routledge, London, pp. 217–242.Google Scholar
  48. Schuster JA (1995a) The Scientific Revolution: An Introduction to the History and Philosophy of Science. Open Learning Australia. Located at http://descartes-agonistes.com/
  49. Schuster JA (1995b) An Introduction to the History and Social Studies of Science. Open Learning Australia. Located at http://descartes-agonistes.com/
  50. Schuster JA (2000) Internalist and Externalist Historiographies of the Scientific Revolution. In Applebaum W (ed). Encyclopedia of the Scientific Revolution. Garland Publishing, New York.Google Scholar
  51. Schuster JA (2002) L’Aristotelismo e le sue Alternative. In Garber В (ed). La Rivoluzione Scientifica. Instituto della Enciclopedia Italiana, Roma, pp. 337–357.Google Scholar
  52. Schuster JA (2013a) Descartes–Agonistes: Physico–Mathematics, Method and Corpuscular–Mechanism, 1619–1633. Springer, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schuster JA (2013b) 科学革命: 科学史与科学哲学导论. (上海科学技术出版社, 上海) [The Scientific Revolution: Introduction to the History & Philosophy of Science; Translated by An Weifu]. Shanghai Scientific and Technological Education Publishing, Shanghai.Google Scholar
  54. Schuster JA (2013c) What was the relation of Baroque Culture to the Trajectory of Early Modern Natural Philosophy. In Gal O, Chen-Morris R (eds). Science in the Age of Baroque. Archives internationales d’histoire des idées 208:13–45.Google Scholar
  55. Schuster JA, Watchirs G (1990) Natural Philosophy, Experiment and Discourse: Beyond the Kuhn/Bachelard Problematic. In Le Grande HE (ed). Experimental Inquiries: Historical, Philosophical and Social Studies of Experimentation in Science. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 1–47.Google Scholar
  56. Schuster JA, Taylor ABH (1997) Blind Trust: The Gentlemanly Origins of Experimental Science. Social Studies of Science 27:503–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Schuster JA, Brody J (2013) Descartes and Sunspots: Matters of Fact and Systematising Strategies in the Principia Philosophiae, Annals of Science 70/1:1–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schutz A (1970) Reflections on the Problem of Relevance. Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
  59. Schutz A, Luckmann T (1973) The Structures of the Life-World. Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
  60. Shapin S (1982) History of Science and its Sociological Reconstructions. History of Science 20:157–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shapin S (1992) Discipline and Bounding: The History and Sociology of Science As Seen Through the Externalism-Internalism Debate. History of Science 30:333–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Stone L (1972) The Causes of the English Revolution 1529–1642. Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Unit for History and Philosophy of Science & Sydney Centre for the Foundations of ScienceUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations