化学的极限:威廉·格里高利如何挑战“既定科学”的边界,1820-1850。

IF 0.4 3区 哲学 Q3 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science Pub Date : 2021-03-20 Epub Date: 2019-10-23 DOI:10.1098/rsnr.2019.0025
Ellen Packham
{"title":"化学的极限:威廉·格里高利如何挑战“既定科学”的边界,1820-1850。","authors":"Ellen Packham","doi":"10.1098/rsnr.2019.0025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this paper, I examine the controversial career of William Gregory (1803-1858). As a chemistry professor and chemical author, Gregory made many attempts to redefine the bounds of chemical science to incorporate mesmerism, phrenology and animal magnetism. I use a series of letters between Gregory and the prominent phrenologist George Combe to highlight the fact that the definition of 'established science' and its disciplinary boundaries were matters that occupied the thoughts and affected the careers of both men. Gregory maintained his reputation as a chemist while simultaneously being ridiculed for his public promotion of phrenology, mesmerism and animal magnetism. Where previous scholarship has tended to separate Gregory's chemical work from his support for disputed phenomena, this paper aims to prove that, for Gregory and his contemporaries, work on mesmerism, animal magnetism and phrenology was methodologically inseparable from chemical work. Gregory argued that all facts and theories should be judged and debated using the same criteria for credibility, accuracy, scepticism and rigour. He and others pushed to include contested phenomena within the boundaries of science to ensure that the facts, controversies and theories relating to them could be subjected to the same rigorous investigation and legitimate debates as were expected of chemical facts and theories.</p>","PeriodicalId":49744,"journal":{"name":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2019.0025","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The limits of Chemistry: how William Gregory contested the boundaries of 'established science', 1820-1850.\",\"authors\":\"Ellen Packham\",\"doi\":\"10.1098/rsnr.2019.0025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In this paper, I examine the controversial career of William Gregory (1803-1858). As a chemistry professor and chemical author, Gregory made many attempts to redefine the bounds of chemical science to incorporate mesmerism, phrenology and animal magnetism. I use a series of letters between Gregory and the prominent phrenologist George Combe to highlight the fact that the definition of 'established science' and its disciplinary boundaries were matters that occupied the thoughts and affected the careers of both men. Gregory maintained his reputation as a chemist while simultaneously being ridiculed for his public promotion of phrenology, mesmerism and animal magnetism. Where previous scholarship has tended to separate Gregory's chemical work from his support for disputed phenomena, this paper aims to prove that, for Gregory and his contemporaries, work on mesmerism, animal magnetism and phrenology was methodologically inseparable from chemical work. Gregory argued that all facts and theories should be judged and debated using the same criteria for credibility, accuracy, scepticism and rigour. He and others pushed to include contested phenomena within the boundaries of science to ensure that the facts, controversies and theories relating to them could be subjected to the same rigorous investigation and legitimate debates as were expected of chemical facts and theories.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49744,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1098/rsnr.2019.0025\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2019.0025\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2019/10/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Notes and Records-The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2019.0025","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/10/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本文中,我考察了威廉·格里高利(1803-1858)备受争议的职业生涯。作为一名化学教授和化学作家,格雷戈里多次尝试重新定义化学科学的界限,包括催眠术、颅相学和动物磁学。我用格列高利和著名的颅相学家乔治·库姆之间的一系列信件来强调这样一个事实,即“既定科学”的定义及其学科界限占据了两人的思想并影响了他们的职业生涯。格里高利保持着化学家的声誉,同时却因公开推广颅相学、催眠术和动物磁学而受到嘲笑。以前的学术研究倾向于将格里高利的化学工作与他对有争议现象的支持分开,本文旨在证明,对于格里高利和他的同时代人来说,催眠术、动物磁学和颅相学的研究在方法上与化学工作是不可分割的。格雷戈里认为,所有的事实和理论都应该用同样的可信度、准确性、怀疑性和严谨性标准来评判和辩论。他和其他人推动将有争议的现象纳入科学的范围,以确保与之相关的事实、争议和理论能够受到与化学事实和理论同样严格的调查和合法的辩论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The limits of Chemistry: how William Gregory contested the boundaries of 'established science', 1820-1850.

In this paper, I examine the controversial career of William Gregory (1803-1858). As a chemistry professor and chemical author, Gregory made many attempts to redefine the bounds of chemical science to incorporate mesmerism, phrenology and animal magnetism. I use a series of letters between Gregory and the prominent phrenologist George Combe to highlight the fact that the definition of 'established science' and its disciplinary boundaries were matters that occupied the thoughts and affected the careers of both men. Gregory maintained his reputation as a chemist while simultaneously being ridiculed for his public promotion of phrenology, mesmerism and animal magnetism. Where previous scholarship has tended to separate Gregory's chemical work from his support for disputed phenomena, this paper aims to prove that, for Gregory and his contemporaries, work on mesmerism, animal magnetism and phrenology was methodologically inseparable from chemical work. Gregory argued that all facts and theories should be judged and debated using the same criteria for credibility, accuracy, scepticism and rigour. He and others pushed to include contested phenomena within the boundaries of science to ensure that the facts, controversies and theories relating to them could be subjected to the same rigorous investigation and legitimate debates as were expected of chemical facts and theories.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Notes and Records is an international journal which publishes original research in the history of science, technology and medicine. In addition to publishing peer-reviewed research articles in all areas of the history of science, technology and medicine, Notes and Records welcomes other forms of contribution including: research notes elucidating recent archival discoveries (in the collections of the Royal Society and elsewhere); news of research projects and online and other resources of interest to historians; essay reviews, on material relating primarily to the history of the Royal Society; and recollections or autobiographical accounts written by Fellows and others recording important moments in science from the recent past.
期刊最新文献
The making of early modern eye models Anthropological Glimpses of Japan in Nineteenth-Century Britain Minakata Kumagusu in London: Challenging Eurocentrism in the pages of Nature Gassendi's second thought. From a materialistic picture of cognition to the defence of dualism: the lasting influence of the polemic with descartes R. A. Fisher on J. A. Cobb's The problem of the sex-ratio
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1