The History, Philosophy and Mythology of Science an Unholy Triumvirate.
Since at least the early 1960s it has been common practice to regard the history and philosophy of science as a specious of Siamese twins somehow joined at the hip, in a well-known (well-known amongst philosophers of science that is!) bon mot Imre Lakatos wrote, “philosophy of science without history of science is empty; history of science without philosophy of science blind” producing a wonderfully Münchhausian definition of the two disciplines and their interdependency. One cannot do history of science without first defining what this thing ‘science’ is that one wishes to investigate historically, a task that definitely belongs to the philosophy of science. On the other hand for the philosopher of science to define ‘science’ he really needs a comprehensive knowledge of how it evolved historically. A classical chicken and egg problem that can only be solved by ‘science’ lifting itself out of the sump of vagueness on its own hair.
In this blog I intend mostly to deal with the history of science in the early modern period, that is roughly the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries (although I will allow myself to roam into other time periods as the mood takes me) and I shall be guided by my own personal blend of the philosophy of science that is made up of roughly equal parts of Lakatos, Paul Feyerabend, Stephen Toulmin, Christopher Hill, Erlanger Constructivism and my own weird take on the discipline that involves such concepts as ‘patchwork pluralism’ and the ‘drunken hotel guest theory’ of the progress of science, both of which are potential themes for future postings. My historiography is also guided by my own dictum, ‘methodology becomes dogma; dogma blinds’.
However it is the third member of the unholy triumvirate listed in the title that is the main driving force for most of my work and will also provide much of the substance of this blog, the mythology of science. It is considered a prerequisite for an educated person to know the main features of the history of Western science and these are duly taught in our schools, colleges and universities. Unfortunately that, which most people believe to be the principle or outline ‘facts’ of the history of science are not facts at all but myths. What is taught in our educational establishments is not the history of science but the mythology of science. Unfortunately this pervasion of falsehoods is not restricted to polite cocktail party chat but is used by such people as historians and philosophers (of the non-scientific variety) to formulate their theories, leading to some real intellectual perversions. My life’s function as a historian of science is to serve as a myths-of-science buster and one of the principle functions of this blog is to expose and explode those myths.
Like all of my role models I of course reserve the right to also blog about anything and everything that takes my fancy or currently occupies the vacant lot that I call my brain.
I hope some will stick around for the ride.