Peter Dear is professor of science and technology studies and history at Cornell University. His research interest include: Early-modern science and epistemology; historical sociology of knowledge; history of scientific rhetoric.
In The Intelligibility of Nature, Peter Dear considers how science as an idea and a discipline has evolved and positioned itself. His intellectual journey begins with a crucial observation: that scientific ambition is, and has been, directed toward two distinct but frequently conflated ends—doing and knowing.
Teasing out this tension between doing and knowing during key episodes in the history of science—mechanical philosophy and Newtonian gravitation, elective affinities and the chemical revolution, enlightened natural history and taxonomy, evolutionary biology, the dynamical theory of electromagnetism, and quantum theory—Dear reveals how the two principles became formalized into a single enterprise, science, that would be carried out by a new kind of person, the scientist.
Finely nuanced and elegantly conceived, The Intelligibility of Nature will be essential reading for aficionados and historians of science alike.
發表於2024-11-19
The Intelligibility of Nature 2024 pdf epub mobi 電子書 下載
科學作為一種概念或紀律如何在歷史中演化? 從力學哲理、牛頓引力、化學革命、自然歷史啟濛、生物進化、磁場動力、量子理論……等等範疇,美國康乃爾大學科技及歷史教授Peter Dear 將揭示「知」、「行」兩大科學原則如何閤而為一架構,並為世世代代科學傢所遵從、實踐。
評分科學作為一種概念或紀律如何在歷史中演化? 從力學哲理、牛頓引力、化學革命、自然歷史啟濛、生物進化、磁場動力、量子理論……等等範疇,美國康乃爾大學科技及歷史教授Peter Dear 將揭示「知」、「行」兩大科學原則如何閤而為一架構,並為世世代代科學傢所遵從、實踐。
評分科學作為一種概念或紀律如何在歷史中演化? 從力學哲理、牛頓引力、化學革命、自然歷史啟濛、生物進化、磁場動力、量子理論……等等範疇,美國康乃爾大學科技及歷史教授Peter Dear 將揭示「知」、「行」兩大科學原則如何閤而為一架構,並為世世代代科學傢所遵從、實踐。
評分科學作為一種概念或紀律如何在歷史中演化? 從力學哲理、牛頓引力、化學革命、自然歷史啟濛、生物進化、磁場動力、量子理論……等等範疇,美國康乃爾大學科技及歷史教授Peter Dear 將揭示「知」、「行」兩大科學原則如何閤而為一架構,並為世世代代科學傢所遵從、實踐。
評分科學作為一種概念或紀律如何在歷史中演化? 從力學哲理、牛頓引力、化學革命、自然歷史啟濛、生物進化、磁場動力、量子理論……等等範疇,美國康乃爾大學科技及歷史教授Peter Dear 將揭示「知」、「行」兩大科學原則如何閤而為一架構,並為世世代代科學傢所遵從、實踐。
圖書標籤: 科學史 視覺文化 科學人文 媒介史 哲學 (English)
Six fine case studies; the purpose of using "intelligibility" as a category for all is not clearly stated.
評分挺有意思的幾個例子,尤其是牛頓自己對action-at-a-distance without medium的懷疑論和19世紀電磁的context中關於ether的論據,說明歸根結底intelligible的標準還是深受17世紀的mechanical contact的影響。具體例子雖然有意思但是和intro裏麵natural philosophy vs instrumentality這段討論似乎毫無關係。
評分Six fine case studies; the purpose of using "intelligibility" as a category for all is not clearly stated.
評分挺有意思的幾個例子,尤其是牛頓自己對action-at-a-distance without medium的懷疑論和19世紀電磁的context中關於ether的論據,說明歸根結底intelligible的標準還是深受17世紀的mechanical contact的影響。具體例子雖然有意思但是和intro裏麵natural philosophy vs instrumentality這段討論似乎毫無關係。
評分挺有意思的幾個例子,尤其是牛頓自己對action-at-a-distance without medium的懷疑論和19世紀電磁的context中關於ether的論據,說明歸根結底intelligible的標準還是深受17世紀的mechanical contact的影響。具體例子雖然有意思但是和intro裏麵natural philosophy vs instrumentality這段討論似乎毫無關係。
The Intelligibility of Nature 2024 pdf epub mobi 電子書 下載