Abstract
This essay is intended to contribute to the debate about the internal or external historiography of the rise of modern science. The internal-external distinction defines the contest between two explanatory programs. The one analyzes the scientific revolution of the seventeenth century as a cognitive transformation in the history of the endogenous development of intellectual structures, the other seeks the reasons for this transformation in the technical, economic and cultural conditions of the society (2). The point of contention between the two programs is that the internal program not only seeks to reconstruct the development of science logically but also to explain it historically. It assumes an independent history of intellectual structures; the development of the forms of knowledge is an independent variable of cultural evolution. The external program, on the other hand, views the social structures and the environment of science not simply as contingent boundary conditions or as a complementary dimension of the development of the logical structures of thought but regards them as constitutive of these.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bacon, F., Works, ed. by J. Spedding, R. Ellis, and D. D. Heath, Boston: Brown & Taggard, 1860/64.
Kuhn, T., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago: University of Chicago Press
1962.
Kuhn, T., ‘Scientific Growth: Reflections on Ben-David’s ‘Scientific Role’,’ Minerva 10, 1972, 173–4.
Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A. (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1970.
Merton, R., Science, Technology and Society in Seventeenth-Century England, New York: Fertig, 1970.
Nelson, B., ‘The Early Modern Revolution in Science and Philosophy: Fictionalism, Probabilism, Fidelism, and Catholic ‘Prophetism’,’ in R. S. Cohen and M. Wartofsky (eds.), Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. III, Dordrecht: Reidel, 1968, 1–40.
Ornstein, M., The Role of Scientific Societies in the Seventeenth Century, reprint of the third edition of 1938. London: Archon Books, 1963.
Rattansi, P., ‘Paracelsus and the Puritan Revolution’, Ambix 11, 1963, 24–32.
Rattansi, P., ‘The Helmontian-Galenist Controversy in Restoration England’, Ambix 12, 1964, 1–23.
Rattansi, P., ‘The Intellectual Origins of the Royal Society’, Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London 23, 1968, 129–143.
Rattansi, P., ‘The Social Interpretation of Science in the Seventeenth Century’, in P. Mathias (ed.), Science and Society 1600–1900, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972, 1–32.
Rossi, P., Francis Bacon. From Magic to Science, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1968.
Santilliana, G. de, Reflections on Men and Ideas, Cambridge, Mass: The M.I.T. Press, 1968.
Shapiro, B., ‘Latitudinarianism and Science in the Seventeenth Century England’, Past and Present 40, 1968, 16–41.
Sprat, T., History of the Royal Society (1667), (ed. with critical apparatus by Jackson Cope and Harold W. Jones), St. Louis, Missouri: Washington University Studies, 1958.
Stegmüller, W., Theorie and Erfahrung (Probleme und Resultate der Wissenschaftstheorie und analytischen Philosophie Bd. II), 2. Halbband, Theorienstrukturen und Theoriendynamik. Berlin, Heidelberg, New-York: Springer, 1973.
Teich, M. and Young, R. (eds.), Changing Perspectives in the History of Science. Essays in Honour of Joseph Needham, London: Heinemann, 1973.
Toulmin, St., Human Understanding, Vol. I. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972.
Trevor-Roper, H., Religion, the Reformation and Social Change, London: Macmillan, 1967.
Webster, C., ‘English Medical Reformers of the Puritan Revolution: A Background to the ‘Society of Chymical Physitians’,’ Ambix 14, 1967, 16–41.
Webster, C. (ed.), Samuel Hartlib and the Advancement of Learning, London: Cambridge University Press, 1970.
Webster, C., The Great Instauration. Science, Medicine and Reform 1626–1660, New York: Holmes & Meier, 1976.
Wilkinson, R., ‘The Hartlib Papers and Seventeenth Century Chemistry’, Ambix 15, 1968, 54–69.
Yates, F., The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972.
Zilsel, E., ‘The Sociological Roots of Science’, American Journal of Sociology XLVII, 1942, 245–279.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1977 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht-Holland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Van Den Daele, W. (1977). The Social Construction of Science: Institutionalisation and Definition of Positive Science in the Latter Half of the Seventeenth Century . In: Mendelsohn, E., Weingart, P., Whitley, R. (eds) The Social Production of Scientific Knowledge. Sociology of the Sciences A Yearbook, vol 1. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1186-0_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1186-0_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-277-0776-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-1186-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive