The speech introducing the session on the history of science at a 1983 colloquium on the history of ideas in Oxford, England, is presented. The main concerns of scientific thought in the West are outlined, from the time of the ancient Greeks to the present, focusing on landmark ideas such as those of the eighteenth-century French philosophers & of Charles Darwin. The process by which scientific ideas are absorbed by a society & interact with its existing beliefs is examined. C. Waters
Creativity, Psychology, and the History of Science offers for the first time a comprehensive overview of the oeuvre of Howard E. Gruber, who is noted for his contributions both to the psychology of creativity and to the history of science. The present book includes papers from a wide range of topics. In the contributions to creativity research, Gruber proposes his key ideas for studying creative work. Gruber focuses on how the thinking, motivation and affect of extraordinarily creative individuals evolve and how they interact over long periods of time. Gruber's approach bridges many disciplines and subdisciplines in psychology and beyond, several of which are represented in the present volume: cognitive psychology, developmental psychology, history of science, aesthetics, and politics. The volume thus presents a unique and comprehensive contribution to our understanding of the creative process. Many of Gruber's papers have not previously been easily accessible, they are presented here in thoroughly revised form.
In recent years explicitly utopian visions have reappeared across the political spectrum. To a surprising degree these visions have drawn on histories and science and technology. What should scholars of Science and Technology Studies (STS) and History and Philosophy of Science (HPS) make of these developments? The concept of utopia has often been treated with considerable distrust in these fields, as an indication of closed end-directed blueprints, or as an indication of fantasies of limitless technological improvement and purification of categories. Alongside this uneasiness, however, HPS and STS scholars have also projected transformative ambitions, seeking to recover from the past different ways of knowing and relating to the human and non-human world. By engaging with critiques of utopia from thinkers including Karl Popper, Otto Neurath, Bruno Latour, Isabelle Stengers and Donna Haraway, and exploring some of the utopian strands which have recurred in studies of science and technology—including the longing for integration, the association of science with planning, and the ways in which feminist scholars have envisaged alternative forms of science—we can understand the ongoing, and often unrecognised, utopian dimensions of HPS and STS.
The article is a review of the textbook on the history of Russian archaeology prepared by A. S. Skripkin, professor of Volgograd State University, a well-known archaeologist specializing in the study of the Sarmatian tribes. The textbook was issued by the "Urait" publishing company in 2017. The first part, dominating in amount, is devoted to the history of the development of the Russian archaeology from the 18th century until the last quarter of the 20th century. The second part briefly outlines the topic well-known to the author — the history of archaeological research in the Lower Volga region in the same chronological period. However, the main problem of the reviewed publication is the author's failure to use a considerable number of works published on this subject over the last 25 years. Almost all the information contained in the first section of the textbook was borrowed from the books by A. A. Formozov, G. S. Lebedev, V. F. Gening, A. D. Pryakhin published in the 1980s and early 1990s. However, in the years passed since then, a whole direction connected with the study of various aspects of its history has been formed in the Russian archaeology. A significant range of monographic publications, collections of articles and conference materials have been published; more than fifty candidate and doctoral dissertations have been defended. Unfortunately, all this remained beyond the scope of A. S. Skripkin. Therefore, there are numerous out-of-date ideas concerning various subjects connected with the formation and development of the Russian archaeology. Furthermore, the text contains a considerable number of factual errors, inaccuracies, misprints.