자연사박물관의 진화관 전시물 패널에 반영된 과학의 본성 분석 : 서대문 자연사박물관과 시카고 자연사박물관 중심으로

정감순 단국대학교 교육대학원 2011 국내석사

The revised educational curriculum of 2009 emphasizes the creative experimental activities. As one of the experience activities, there is a field trip to the natural history museum which is a non-formal educational institutions and it is extremely important that the exhibition panel contents of these places achieve the educational purposes effectively. Therefore the purpose of this study is to analyze the exhibition panel of Korea's natural history museums in terms of the scientific nature and try to allow the students to experience a variety of scientific elementary knowledge. For this, the contents that have been on the exhibition panel of the Seodaemun Museum of Natural History and Chicago Natural History Museum were classified by reference to the nature of science and the characteristics of the two institutions were compared. First, The nature of science provides the knowledge that was generated by the nature of science. Second, make students participate in the experiments, science process skills, and reasoning. Third, explain the thoughts, jobs, and spirit of the scientists. Fourth, analyze the science, technology and knowledge between the structure of society, and social interaction by analyzing into largely 4 types. The results are as follows. First, according to the analysis of the nature of science at the Seodaemun Museum of Natural History, the number of panels exhibited at the evolution hall was 85 and the number of panels exhibited at the evolution hall of the Chicago Natural History Museum was 259. There was a significant differences. The Panel of "Category I" showed 92% at the Seodaemun Museum of Natural History and 86% at the Chicago Natural History Museum, the Panel of "Category II" showed 19% of Seodaemun Museum of Natural History and 22% of the Chicago Natural History Museum, the Panel of "Category III" showed 5% of Seodaemun Museum of Natural History and 17% of the Chicago Natural History Museum, the Panel of "Category IV" showed 0% of Seodaemun Museum of Natural History and 2% of the Chicago Natural History Museum. Secondly, even if the exhibition had the same subject, according to characteristics of the natural history museum, they were shown differently and although the importance of the nature of science was emphasized in science education, it couldn't achieve the educational effects substantially. As an informal educational place, Natural History Museums are playing the complementary roles with school education and is putting in a lot of efforts in teaching the nature of science. however the exhibition methods of Korean natural history museums are biased in only one out of the four nature of science so it was confirmed that it was lacking to reflect the diversity of nature of science. In order for the exhibitions to efficiently educate the nature of science to the learners in the future, many supplements will be needed for the categories with the low ratio. 2009개정 교육과정은 창의적 체험 활동을 강조하고 있다. 체험활동의 하나로 비형식 교육기관인 자연사박물관의 견학이 있으며 이곳의 전시물 패널내용은 교육목적을 효과적으로 달성하는데 매우 중요하다. 따라서 본 연구의 목적은 우리나라 자연사박물관의 전시물 패널을 과학적 본성 측면에서 분석하여 학생들이 다양한 과학적 소양을 경험할 수 있도록 하는데 있다. 이를 위하여 서대문 자연사박물관과 시카고 자연박물관의 진화관에 전시된 패널 내용을 과학의 본성에 준거하여 구분하고 두 기관의 특성을 비교 분석하였다. 과학의 본성은 첫째, 과학과 과학의 본성에 의해 생성된 지식을 제공한다. 둘째, 실험, 과학과정 기능, 추론에 학생들을 참여시킨다. 셋째, 과학자들의 생각, 일(작업)과 과학적 정신을 설명한다. 넷째, 과학, 기술 그리고 지식의 사회성과 사회적 구조사이와 상호작용으로 크게 4가지로 나누어 분석하였다. 그 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 서대문 자연사박물관에 나타난 과학의 본성 분석 결과 진화관에 전시된 패널의 수는 85개이고, 시카고 자연사박물관의 진화관에 전시된 패널 수는 259개로 현저한 차이를 보인다. ‘범주Ⅰ’의 패널은 서대문 자연사박물관(92%), 시카고 자연사박물관(86%), ‘범주Ⅱ’의 패널은 서대문 자연사박물관(19%), 시카고 자연사박물관(22%), ‘범주Ⅲ’의 패널은 서대문 자연사박물관(5%), 시카고 자연사박물관(17%), ‘범주Ⅳ’의 패널은 서대문 자연사박물관(0%), 시카고 자연사박물관(2%)이다. 둘째, 같은 주제를 가진 전시물이라도 자연사박물관의 특성에 따라 다르게 나타나 있었고, 과학교육에서 과학의 본성의 중요성에 대해 강조되고는 있지만 실질적으로 교육적 효과를 달성하지 못하고 있다. 자연사박물관은 비형식 교육의 장으로서 학교 교육과 상호보완적인 역할을 하여 과학의 본성을 가르치고자 많은 노력을 하고 있는 것으로 보여진다. 그러나 국내 자연사박물관의 전시방법이 과학의 본성 4가지 중 한쪽으로만 편중되어 있어 다양성 있는 과학의 본성을 반영하고 있는 부분이 미흡하다는 것을 확인하였다. 앞으로 전시물이 학습자에게 과학의 본성을 효과적으로 교육을 하기 위해서는 반영비율이 낮은 범주에 대해서 많은 보완이 필요할 것으로 생각된다.

Maxwell, Hertz and Marconi, using the history of science and technology in science education (J. Clerk Maxwell, Guglielmo Marconi, H. Hertz, M. Faraday)

Zito, Fredrick Anthony New York University 2002 해외박사(DDOD)

소속기관이 구독 중이 아닌 경우 오후 4시부터 익일 오전 9시까지 원문보기가 가능합니다.

This dissertation examines the possibility of using a Kuhnian framework to enhance the use of history in the teaching of science. The Kuhnian framework of “revolutionary” and “normal” science, it is noted, provides a simplifying yet explanatory framework for students of science, at the same time making it possible to show the daily life of scientists. Rather than focus only on heroes of science, the work examines the important work of the “normal” scientist and their interplay with “revolutionary” scientists. It is argued that seeing the daily life of the scientist within this framework can show students of science the profound impact of the seemingly simple contributions of the work of scientists. In addition, it is noted that viewing the history of science as shifting paradigms and scientific revolutions will not only enhance students' scientific literacy, but possibly enhance their willingness to pursue science education. A review of the theoretical literature surrounding Kuhn, his followers and his critics, suggest the framework is still salient among educators. A review of the empirical literature and some educational practices suggests that educators see this approach to be effective, especially when the framework and case materials are carefully crafted. The empirical literature also suggests that there is a gap between the prescribed standards (national and state) for teaching the history of science, and actual classroom practice. The Kuhnian framework shows promise for bridging this gap. The dissertation then uses a case history of the discovery of electromagnetic radiation by Faraday, Maxwell, and Hertz et al., culminating in the development wireless telegraphy by Marconi, making possible radio, television, radar, and other contemporary technologies. The dissertation concludes by noting that the use of history as an arena for understanding science, in some way resembles the concept of “reflective thinking”, which is often utilized as a framework for educating new teachers, and for their use in the classroom.

Science, ideology, empire: A history of the "scientific" in Japan from the 1920s to the 1940s

Mizuno, Hiromi University of California, Los Angeles 2001 해외박사(DDOD)

소속기관이 구독 중이 아닌 경우 오후 4시부터 익일 오전 9시까지 원문보기가 가능합니다.

How was science perceived and promoted in mid-twentieth century Japan that relied on folk myth for fashioning its nation and mobilizing nationalism? This dissertation examines discourses of science in Japan from the 1920s to the 1940s. The topic of science has rarely been discussed in the scholarship on interwar (1919–1936) and wartime (1937–1945) Japan, despite the fact that this period was characterized by the development of science in Japan and the flourishing discourse of a uniquely Japanese science. This dissertation focuses on three sites where the concept of the “scientific” was discussed and defined in relation to concepts of the “Japanese”: (1) the field of the history of Japanese science in Japan, with a focus on the leading Marxist intellectuals in this field; (2) the technocrat movement for “science-technology” [kagaku-gijutsu], led by engineer-bureaucrats; and (3) the popular culture of science, as seen in science fiction and popular magazines such as <italic>Science Illustrated</italic> [Kagaku gaho] and <italic>Children's Science</italic> [Kodomo no kagaku]. The protagonists in each site—Marxist historians of science such as Ogura Kinnosuke and Saigusa Hiroto, technocrats like Miyamoto Takenosuke, and popularizers of science such as Harada Mitsuo and Unno Jûza—presented differing and often competing concepts of the “scientific” tailored toward their own agendas for the promotion of science. One goal of this dissertation is to examine the intense politics surrounding the definitions of the “scientific.” The second objective is to demonstrate the complex ways in which these protagonists became incorporated into state war mobilization through what I term scientific nationalism, a call for a more scientific Japan. Scientific nationalism was not only a wartime phenomenon; it continued to shape nationalism in postwar Japan as well. By integrating the topic of science into the intellectual and cultural history of modern Japan as well as using materials such as the popular science magazines that have been overlooked by historians both in Japanese and English scholarship, this dissertation provides a new understanding of Japanese nationalism, imperialism, and war mobilization in the twentieth century.

James B. Conant in the Mid-20c. General Science Education Movement

한채린 서울대학교 대학원 2023 국내석사

누가 과학교육을 배워야 하며, 그랬을 때 무엇을, 어떻게 배워야 하는지는 과학교육의 핵심을 관통하는 세 가지 질문이다. 이 질문들에 대해 오래 전부터 수많은 과학교육자들이 숙고했으나, 아직까지도 완전한 해결책이 나오지 않았다. 과학교육의 역사를 거슬러 올라가면 약 70년 전에 이 질문들을 답하기 위한 대학 수준의 운동, 그리고 개인의 시도가 있었다. 이 연구는 1940-50년대 미국 하버드 대학에서 일어난 대학교양과학교육의 개편, 그리고 그 중심이 있었던 당시의 총장 제임스 코난트(1893-1978)를 살펴봤다. 코난트는 과학, 정치, 그리고 교육의 세 단어로 묘사될 수 있다. 하버드의 총장으로서 코난트는 대학에 새로운 장학금 제도와 교수 임용 및 승진 정책을 시행했다. 제2차 세계 대전에서 코난트는 미국의 국방연구위원회장, 원자폭탄 사용에 대한 임시위원회원 등을 맡았다. 즉, 하버드 대학 총장은 코난트의 정치적, 교육적 측면을 상징하고, 2차 대전 중의 활동은 그의 과학적, 정치적 측면을 대표한다. 그리고 코난트의 과학적, 교육적 측면에 대한 연구가 부족하여 다음과 같은 연구질문을 확립했다. (1) 코난트는 제2차 세계 대전 이후 하버드의 대학교양과학교육 개편에 어떤 역할과 기여를 했는가? (2) 그의 과학교육 저서인 [On Understanding Science]를 통해 확인할 수 있는 코난트의 대학교양과학교육에 대한 생각과 방법에는 무엇이 있는가? 2차 대전 이후 하버드로 돌아온 코난트는 증가한 학생 인구, 다양화된 학생 유형, 그리고 과학에 대해 양면적인 대중 인식을 국면했다. 그는 하버드의 교육을 정상화하기 위해 교양교육에 주목했고, 이에 ‘하버드교양교육개편위원회’를 추진했다. 1945년에 개편위는 이후 널리 배포된 [General Education in a Free Society]라는 보고서를 출판했다. 해당 보고서는 대학교양교육에서의 과학을 단순히 개념적 사실의 축적이 아닌 더 큰 역사적 맥락의 일부로 정의했고, 이에 과학적 방법, 과학 개념의 발전, 그리고 과학적 세계관에 대한 통합적 이해를 대학교양과학교육의 목표로 설정했다. 코난트는 하버드의 교양교육 프로그램에서 직접 ‘On Understanding Science’라는 교양과학 강의를 가르쳤으며, 해당 강의는 그의 대학교양과학교육에 대한 견해를 담은 과학사례적 접근을 사용했다. 그는 강의 자료를 제작하기 위해 저명한 과학사학자, 과학철학자, 그리고 과학교육자(예: Cohen, Holten, Nash, Kuhn)와 협력했다. 이밖에 코난트는 대학교양과학교육의 방향성을 논의하기 위해 과학교육자를 모아 수차례의 회의를 주최하였다. [On Understanding Science (1947)]는 코난트가 직접 가르친 교양과학 강의와 동명으로, 그의 대학교양과학교육에 대한 생각이 담겨 있는 책이다. 이 책에서 그는 ‘Understanding science’와 ‘Tactics and strategy of science’라는 두 용어를 새로 정의하여 자신의 대학교양과학교육과 관련된 철학을 담았다. ‘Understanding science’, 즉 ‘과학을 이해한다는 것’은 과학의 시대에서 과학과 관련된 의사결정을 위해 과학이 할 수 있는 것과 하지 못하는 것에 대한 감각을 의미한다. ‘Tactics and strategy of science’는 과학의 복잡한 발전 양상을 상징하는데, 군사 전술과 전략으로부터 착안하여 과학이 발전하기 위해 복잡한 전술과 전략이 필요하다는 것을 의미한다. 더 나아가 ‘Tactics and strategy of science’는 세 가지의 큰 ‘principle’로 나눠진다: (A) 과학은 개념과 실험 및 관찰 간의 상호작용으로 발전한다. (B) 과학의 실험 및 관찰은 복잡하다. (C) 과학은 기술과 동일하지 않으나 기술과의 상호작용을 통해 발전한다. 코난트의 과학사례적 접근은 과학에 대한 이해를 형성하기 위해 이러한 ‘Tactics and strategy of science’를 다시 세분화하여 근대과학 속 개념의 변천사와 엮었다. 그는 비연대기적, 사건 중심의 전개를 따라 적은 수의 변천 사례에 다양하고 광범위한 ‘principle’를 적용하는 ‘일반화 학습(generalization)’을 사용했다. 본 연구는 코난트를 20세기 중반 미국에서 일어난 대학교양과학교육 운동의 주역으로 봤다. 그는 과학교육에 대한 행정적 차원의 생각을 실천에 옮기며 과학교육 행정가 이상의, 과학교육자적 면모를 보여줬다. 또한 코난트의 ‘principle’은 오늘날 과학교육의 주요 키워드인 과학의 본성(NOS)과 매우 유사할 뿐만 아니라, 그 유사성 덕분에 NOS, 과학적 소양 등 오늘날 과학교육의 여러 주제에 대해 다양한 시사점을 제공했다. At the heart of science education lies the question of whether one should learn science and if so, who should and what of science should be learned. Education is to serve – therefore, it must be considerate of its participants and what it intends to deliver to them. Quite frequently, people of the past have already pondered upon questions that trouble people of today. This research resorted to James B. Conant (1893-1978), the 23rd President of Harvard University for answers to these unresolved questions. Conant was not a new name in literature. He could be described with the three words of science, politics, and education. As the president, Conant implemented new policies on student scholarships and faculty professorships at Harvard – thus, the two words politics and education. During WWII, he served several leadership positions in governmental agencies, namely the Chairman of NDRC to supervise scientific research for military defense and the Interim Committee to negotiate wartime use of the atomic bomb – thus, the two words science and politics. While conducting a literature review on Conant, a gap was found between the two words science and education. Thus, two research questions were established. What roles and contributions did James B. Conant make in the reformation of general science education at Harvard University post-WWII? What were his ideas and methods on general science education at the college level as revealed in one of his books on science education titled On Understanding Science (1947)? When Conant returned to Harvard to revolutionize its education system after WWII, he was faced with a larger, broader student body with ambivalent attitudes toward science. To normalize education at Harvard, he paid special attention to general education. He commissioned the Harvard Committee on General Education, which published the widely-distributed General Education in a Free Society (1945), also known as the Harvard Red Book. The Committee argued for a wider definition of science in general education that saw science as a part of a larger intellectual and historical process, not just an accumulation of facts. The new aim for general science education was to foster an integrative understanding of scientific methods, the development of scientific concepts, and scientific worldviews. Conant personally taught a general science course titled “On Understanding Science”. His take on general science was a historical and philosophical approach incorporating case histories from the history of science. He worked in close proximity with Cohen, Holton, Nash, and Kuhn to assemble the historical materials on which Conant’s case histories were based. He also organized a series of conferences that discussed the future direction of general science education. On Understanding Science (1947) contained Conant’s response to the problems of general science education raised in the Harvard Red Book. Conant carefully concocted two phrases – “Understanding Science” and the “Tactics and Strategy of Science” – to embed his ideas on general science education. Understanding science was having the feel for the Tactics and Strategy of Science (e.g., having a sense of what science could and could not achieve) that supported people in their decision makings on future issues and plans. The Tactics and Strategy of Science represented the ways in which science progressed. Conant, using a metaphor on military tactics and strategy, depicted science, neither as the epitome of impartiality nor rationality, but as a complex process full of barriers and failures. The Tactics and Strategy of Science was further split into three large principles A, B, and C: A emphasized the dynamic interaction between scientific concepts and experimentation or observations; B recognized the intricate quality of experimentation and observations; C differentiated practical arts from science but emphasized its importance to science. Conant weaved his principles of the Tactics and Strategy of Science into the case histories in order to establish some understanding of science. He advocated a generalization learning where broad principles of science were studied from fewer, more detailed case histories. He used a non-linear, plot-driven narrative to discuss various sub-principles at prime moments in the case histories. This research concluded that Conant was one of the protagonists of the general science education movement at the college level that occurred in the mid- 20th century US. He was more than an administrator in science to transfer ideas on science education at the administrative level to actual practice. His principles not only demonstrated close resemblance to the Nature of Science (NOS), a popular concept in today’s science education, but also in general, Conant was able to criticize issues in science education that were still relevant today. Lastly, despite that his approach waned, Conant’s ideas on general science education had lasting impacts on the field, mainly NOS and scientific literacy.

The curious and the learned: Natural history in the early American republic

Lewis, Andrew John Yale University 2001 해외박사(DDOD)

소속기관이 구독 중이 아닌 경우 오후 4시부터 익일 오전 9시까지 원문보기가 가능합니다.

This study offers a cultural history of natural history in the early American republic. It focuses on natural knowledge conflicts to expose epistemological dissonance, competing rules of evidence, and the contested nature of scientific authority. It demonstrates that natural history was not confined to an intellectual elite but was a cultural project in which the American population eagerly participated. But, this democratic interest and the fluid structures of scientific authority spawned idiosyncratic and enthusiastic theories frequently challenged by naturalists positioning themselves as experts. Interpretive disputes between the “curious” and the “learned” exposed competing philosophies of inquiry and incompatible evidentiary rules, different codes of thought and behavior that compelled adherence to unbalanced thresholds of belief in natural history matters. These natural knowledge conflicts shaped the trajectory of American science, the contours of national identity, and everyday interactions with the natural world. The character of early republican natural history was forged in response to the European indictment of American nature, the result of European reliance on theories, not facts. American natural historians advocated personal observation as the best method to catalogue the new nation, arguing that nature would reveal itself to Americans regardless of education or social standing. What was reported resembled folk-knowledge more than modern science. Individual chapters examine tales of submerging swallows, the intersection of botany and market economics, early republican theories of ancient history, and natural theology to reveal how competing forms of natural knowledge frustrated naturalists pushing natural history away from mere fact collecting toward a pattern-driven discipline. This project is as much about early republican culture as the history of science. It demonstrates that an investigation of the natural world was a meeting ground between elites and ordinary Americans, a mutual endeavor in which one interpretive approach eventually took precedence over, but did not eradicate, another. It joins on-going debates about the structure and limits of authority in the years following the Revolution, the persistence of “non scientific” understandings of nature challenging conclusions concerning scientific hegemony.

The flux and reflux of science: The study of the tides and the organization of early Victorian science (Great Britain, William Whewell)

Reidy, Michael Sean University of Minnesota 2000 해외박사(DDOD)

소속기관이 구독 중이 아닌 경우 오후 4시부터 익일 오전 9시까지 원문보기가 가능합니다.

For a fortnight in June, 1835, nine countries observed simultaneously the oceanic tides bordering their countries and their possessions. Over 650 tidal stations participated. This multi-national venture, which William Whewell affirmed to include the most “multiplied and extensive observations yet encountered in science,” was prototypical of what Susan Faye Cannon has termed “Humboldtian science.” This dissertation demonstrates how the beginnings of the politics of imperialism, the economics of a worldwide export trade, and the extensive diffusion of science to the middle and working classes laid the foundation for the increasing expansiveness Humboldtian research and the fruitful connection between science and government. The social matrix and internal mechanisms of this tidal research demonstrates that Humboldtian initiatives relied on a broad base of support and activity. This included significant contributions from Missionary Societies, the British Association, and especially the British Admiralty, from the Preventive Coast Guard to the Duke of Wellington, then Foreign Secretary. I also stress the essential contribution of the working-classes, a group previous historiography often described as mere data collectors. I uncover their roles in not only gathering data, but in initiating research topics, building self-registering instruments, reducing observational data, and advancing mathematical methods of analysis. Whewell's twenty-year research project helped him formulate what it was to do science and placed him at the forefront of the emerging profession of science in the early Victorian era. His approach to tidology was culled from a study of its history and philosophy and followed two major lines of research. The first entailed finding the phenomenological laws of the tides through long-term observations. His second approach entailed short-term but simultaneous observations along the entire coast of Great Britain, and eventually Europe and America. Through a combination of these two approaches, Whewell both advanced the study of the tides and used his experiences as a researcher extensively in his <italic>History</italic> and <italic>Philosophy</italic> to comment on issues of scientific methodology.

Visual culture in eighteenth-century natural history. Botanical illustrations and expeditions in the Spanish Atlantic

Bleichmar, Daniela Princeton University 2005 해외박사(DDOD)

소속기관이 구독 중이 아닌 경우 오후 4시부터 익일 오전 9시까지 원문보기가 가능합니다.

This dissertation investigates the visual culture of natural history in the eighteenth century and its connection to European colonialism. In the second half of the century, Spain sponsored almost thirty scientific expeditions to its colonies, eight of which focused specifically on natural history. The almost 10,000 images produced by the Spanish expeditions, far from being mere ornamental byproducts of natural history investigation, were central to the project. Expeditions constituted visualization projects that enabled naturalists to identify, translate, transport, and appropriate nature. Natural history, I argue, was an overwhelmingly visual discipline whose notion of sight went beyond the physiological act of seeing to involve acts of expert viewing that required training and specialized practices of observation and representation---not sight, but insight. This visual culture of science was very much a material one linking vision to images, drawn or engraved, and to specimens in collections. Furthermore, the act of viewing nature was inextricably linked to colonialism, as visual culture allowed Europeans to identify, translate, transport, and appropriate foreign natures. The visual culture of nature can not be divorced from its colonial exploitation. More than mere representations, images acted as visual avatars replacing objects that did not survive travel and would otherwise remain unseen and unknown by Europeans. Images defined nature as a series of transportable objects whose identity and importance was divorced from the environment where they grew or the culture of its inhabitants. Pictures were used to reject the local as contingent, subjective, and translatable, favoring instead the dislocated global as objective, truthful, and permanent. In the Spanish Americas, however, hybrid scientific and artistic traditions emerged, presenting alternatives that contested and reappropriated nature from this European uniforming vision. The dissertation discusses, among other topics, the status and uses of images in eighteenth-century natural history; the importance of visual material in training the expert eyes and skilled hands of naturalists, artists, and collectors; the role of print culture in establishing a common vocabulary of scientific illustration, and the ways in which colonial naturalists and artists appropriated and transformed European models, producing hybrid, local representations.

Trading in birds: A history of science, economy, and conservation in United States-Colombia relations

Quintero, Camilo The University of Wisconsin - Madison 2007 해외박사(DDOD)

소속기관이 구독 중이 아닌 경우 오후 4시부터 익일 오전 9시까지 원문보기가 가능합니다.

This dissertation uncovers the history behind the trade of Colombian birds as a means to comprehend the complex scientific, economic and environmental relations between the United States and Colombia since the late nineteenth century. Colombia was one of the major exporters of bird feathers to supply the thriving millinery industry in the United States and Europe at the end of the nineteenth century. The global commodification of birds for the fashion industry, however, altered the environmental balance of different regions and the social conditions of many people in Colombia. Although the commercial trade of birds eventually waned in the first decades of the twentieth century, the extraction of birds as a natural resource continued in Colombia, fueled, not by the millinery industry, but by the ornithological interests of rapidly expanding museums of natural history in the United States. How North American expeditions carried out in Colombia were shaped by larger forces of American cultural and economic imperialism in Latin America in the early twentieth century is an important theme of this dissertation. Although unequal power relations favored North American scientists in the trade of birds for scientific purposes, Colombian scientists also used their connection with the United States to pursue their own agendas. A study of ornithology in Colombia during the first decades of the twentieth century also reveals the ways in which nature and nation became intertwined. Rising nationalism, as well as debates about modernity within Colombia, influenced not only the way Colombians understood their natural world but also how they established the first programs to preserve it. The history of the bird trade between Colombia and the United States reveals the opportunities commodity history can bring to the history of science, shifting the scale of analysis from micro-histories to narratives that integrate approaches drawn from economic, environmental and cultural history into more transnational histories of science.

The doctrine of description: Gustav Kirchhoff, classical physics, and the "purpose of all science" in 19th-century Germany

Oldham, Kalil T. Swain University of California, Berkeley 2008 해외박사(DDOD)

소속기관이 구독 중이 아닌 경우 오후 4시부터 익일 오전 9시까지 원문보기가 가능합니다.

In 1875 Berlin University hired Gustav Robert Kirchhoff (1824--1887) to fill its first chair in theoretical physics. When he introduced his inaugural series of lectures that summer, on mechanics, Kirchhoff argued that physics should avoid seeking causal explanations and limit itself only to simple and accurate descriptions of natural phenomena. He held to this position, a brand of epistemological phenomenalism, until his retirement nearly ten years later. Kirchhoff's 1875 lectures represent a manifestation of the complicated relationship between philosophy and physics, which characterizes the history of nineteenth-century German science. Using Kirchhoff's story as a wedge, this dissertation examines that relationship. Kirchhoff's philosophical and methdological stance foreshadowed a rising tide of ambivalence about claims to absolute truth in the natural sciences. Looking at episodes from the history of classical physics (electrodynamics, physical chemistry, and thermodynamics) and the history of philosophy of science, this dissertation highlights the complex ways in which physics and philosophy intertwined in the nineteenth century. A close-knit group of professors---including Kirchhoff, Hermann von Helmholtz, Emil du Bois-Reymond, Robert Bunsen, and Eduard Zeller---negotiated the boundaries of their particular disciplines as they debated the purpose and limits of scientific inquiry in general. While philosophical reflections by natural scientists were not uncommon, the methodological and epistemological positions developed by Kirchhoff and his colleagues---at Heidelberg and Berlin---are important because they provided a framework for discussions of the foundations of modern theoretical physics. Occurring in the generation after Kirchhoff's, these foundational discussions paved the way for the modern revolutions in physics and their profound philosophical implications. Kirchhoff's decision to divorce the natural sciences from metaphysical notions, therefore, had significant consequences for science and philosophy in the years around the fin de siecle. The audience for this dissertation will include historians of German physics, historians of nineteenth-century science in general, scholars interested in the intersection between the history of science and philosophy, and those interested in the broader interaction between science and culture.

"Scientific colonialism": Scientific practice and Chicana/o identity in an American southwest technopole (New Mexico)

Guillen, Reynal Reginio University of California, Los Angeles 2004 해외박사(DDOD)

소속기관이 구독 중이 아닌 경우 오후 4시부터 익일 오전 9시까지 원문보기가 가능합니다.

In November 1942, General Groves and Oppenheimer chose the Manhattan Project "Site Y" at Los Alamos, New Mexico to construct the atomic bomb. Since then, the Los Alamos laboratory has had a provocative local sociocultural history. The "social contract," a "scientific colonialism," between the science city and its neighboring communities is exemplified by structures, ideologies and practices in the localized political economy that subordinated Hispanics and Pueblo Indians. Chapters 1 and 2 introduce the problem and survey the bodies of literature needed to analyze this topic's complexity. Chapters 3 and 4 comprise the origin and character of the scientific colonialism. Chapter 3 shows the economic history leading up to the intrusion; the Army's dispossession of Spanish homesteaders; the strong sense of community that developed in the military landscape; and the science city organization. Chapter 4 details how the Los Alamos "big science" technopole subordinated the local Spanish and pueblo Indian through the societal structures of nationalist science policy, education, economics and management practices. Laboratory managers focused on national science policies while neglecting local interests. Secondary schools maintained educational disparities with neighbors and higher education ranked social status. Procurement policies excluded local businesses from primary contractor status and sixty years of billion dollar funding did not enhance neighbor's economic status; and the only forum for community representation was prematurely disbanded by the DOE. Chapter 5 documents labor opposition to discriminatory management practices. Hispanic underrepresentation in upper level management and scientist positions has been a historical problem. In 1995, a grass-roots labor organization challenged management practices when the Director laid off "support staff" to increase scientific productivity. In the end, managers fired a disproportionately large amount of Hispanic employees. The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs confirmed the discriminatory charges filed against the laboratory and University of California forcing a settlement. The final chapter examines the "social contract" between science and society; qualifications on the scientific colonialism model; and ideological dichotomies that transformed local people's cultural distinctiveness into subordination.