Search

This article analyses the production and reception of the natural history film series Secrets of Nature (1919–33) and its sequel Secrets of Life (1934–47), exploring what these films reveal about the role of cinema in public discourses about science and nature in interwar Britain. The first part of the article introduces the Secrets using an 'intermedial' approach, linking the kinds of natural history that they displayed to contemporary trends in interwar popular science, from print publications to zoos. It examines how scientific knowledge was communicated in the series, especially the appeal to everyday experience as a vehicle to engage mass audiences with scientific subjects. The second part examines the Secrets series through the lens of knowledge co-production, detailing how a range of different figures, including academic scientists, nature photographers, producers and teachers, became entangled in making the films. Recovering the term 'ciné-biology', it argues that Secrets developed a unique style of filmmaking that generated cultural space for the life sciences in British popular culture. The third part analyses two interwar cinema experiments to explore how audiences, imagined and real, shaped the kinds of natural knowledge characterized by the Secrets films. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay traces the history of normality's development through a photographic research program that itself began with a critique of that very concept. In the 1920s, a group of child development researchers around the psychologist and physician Arnold Gesell constructed the photographic dome—at once laboratory, observatory, and film studio—to assess normal mental development. Although seeking to challenge standardized measurements of the normal, the researchers created a set of developmental norms that shaped a universal understanding of what constituted a normal child. This essay examines the foundation of this pervasive knowledge by tracking the material factors of visual technology and media production: organizing scientific research like film production, Gesell and his team began to think of development in photographic sequences. Film technology configured their ideas about the individuality of every child, gave rise to a democratic variety of norms, and linked the scientific laboratory with private households and public life. The essay thus argues that visual technologies, beyond merely providing a scientific method and a means of popular distribution, constituted far-reaching theories regarding the normal child. This media-material perspective demonstrates that focusing on visual technologies in science can help to denaturalize knowledge about human nature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay examines the financial context of the development of modern science in Republican China (1912–1949) during the 1920s. At that time, funding for related endeavors was channeled first through the China Medical Board of the Rockefeller Foundation and then through the China Foundation for the Promotion of Education and Culture, a body that oversaw part of America's remission of indemnities paid by China under the Boxer Protocol (1901). Although both entities drew their entire funding from U.S. sources, the transition from the private foundation as principal patron to the backflow of indemnities can be seen as a process through which Chinese promoters and practitioners of science earnestly sought and eventually secured control of resources for their own institution-building efforts. Still more important, active Chinese involvement extended the role of these funding agents from mere donors of physical assets to portals where concerned individuals and organizations intersected. It was this new capacity that smoothed the way for a self-perpetuating scientific community to emerge and prosper well into the 1930s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay explores how hormone treatments were used to optimize and normalize individuals under Italian Fascism. It does so by taking the activities of the Biotypological Orthogenetic Institute − an Italian eugenics and endocrinological centre founded by Nicola Pende in 1926 − as the prime example of a version of eugenics, biotypology, which was based on hormone therapies. This essay first demonstrates that Italian Fascist biopolitics was not only concerned with increasing the size of the Italian population, but also with improving its quality. It suggests that under the Italian Fascist regime hormone therapies became eugenic tools of intervention to improve the Italian race. Second, while Pende's institute purportedly enhanced men and women, its activities show the extent to which the 'techniques of normalization' pursued by the Fascist regime were both systematic and invasive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article, through a case study of the Royal Dublin Society (RDS), traces the reception, experimentation with, and uses of radium in early twentieth-century Ireland. Throughout the nineteenth century there was increasing state intervention in the provision of scientific and technical education in Ireland. This culminated in the loss of the RDS's traditional role in this area. The article demonstrates that the RDS was forced to re-envisage its role as a scientific institution by actively seeking to support experimental research. Using radium as a case study, the article argues for the success of this tactic. It demonstrates that radium played a central role within the RDS as a nexus for the maintenance of an experimental and philanthropic culture that permeated much of the society's scientific output in this period. In doing this it highlights the importance of sociability in the promotion of science in Ireland in the early twentieth century. In addition, it explores the role of the RDS as an arbiter of scientific authority. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we give an account of the awarding of the 1961 Söderström Gold Medal to Piero Sraffa by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (Kungliga Vetenskapsakademien). We highlight the central role that Gunnar Myrdal played in the allocation of this prize to Sraffa and the amicable relationship between these two economists, as well as their views on Ricardian economics. In addition, we provide details of Sraffa's activities in Stockholm, including his attendance at the award ceremony. In our final remarks, we reflect on the significance of the 1961 Söderström Gold Medal for the history of economics as a field of study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The decades of the 1920s to the 1960s were a period of transformation in chemical science. The era was marked by erosion of boundaries that had often been drawn between chemistry and other scientific disciplines. In particular, theories, instruments, and mathematical approaches associated with the new physics of X-rays, the electron particle, and the electron wave enabled chemists and other physical scientists to address unsolved chemical problems of structure and mechanism and to ask new questions that further expanded and transcended disciplinary borders. In turn, the historiography of these developments reflects the pluralism of chemistry in historical narratives written by scientists, historians, philosophers, and sociologists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of 'public science' has been fruitfully used to indicate the intricate interrelatedness of science and society. In studies of knowledge and its publics, however, technology has been routinely subsumed under science and the distinctive nature of technical knowledge neglected. We are aiming in this article at conceptualizing the public nature of technologies. First, we start with surveying the literature on public science. Second, we scrutinize various conceptual approaches to better understand the social and cultural factors embedded in technologies. In so doing, we reflect upon the twentieth-century history of technologies as public things. Third, we focus on nuclear energy in Europe as an exemplary case of a large-scale technology which has been shaped as part of public culture. We suggest that the specificities of the nuclear as a publicly shaped societal entity can be understood as an example of the wider category we propose to call 'public technologies'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The general post-communist perspective of historiography on the Cold War era is that the world was divided into two blocs, so different and isolated from one another that there was no interaction between them whatsoever. As revisionist literature is expanding, the uncovered data indicates a far more complex reality, with a dynamic East-West exchange of goods, money, information, human resources, and technology, be it formal or informal, official or underground, institutional or personal. The current volume History of Communism in Europe: Breaking the Wall: National and Transnational Perspectives on East-European Science tries to confer more detail to this perspective, by bringing together research papers that focus on the history of science during the Cold War. The articles cover a wide range of subjects, from biology to philosophy and from espionage to medical practices, all sharing an ideological context that continuously impacted and molded the professional relations among scholars from both sides of the Iron Curtain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides an account of Chinese translations of Newton’sPrincipiaproduced over the past century and a half within the larger context of the dissemination of Newtonian philosophy in China. Given its fundamental importance in the history of science, thePrincipia,originally penned in Latin, has been translated into a number of other languages. While in all these languages no more than two full translations have appeared, as many as four complete versions in Chinese have been produced since the 1850s, when first attempts were made to translate thePrincipiain late imperial China. They include a 1931 version in semi-classical Chinese completed during the Republican era and three rival versions in modern Chinese published in contemporary China. This rich history of translating thePrincipiainto Chinese, which remains little known to scholars in the West, is for the first time reconstructed and presented in English. This account is based on a meticulous scrutiny of manuscripts, historical records, secondary literature and interviews with some of the contemporary translators. It demonstrates that Chinese translation of thePrincipiais a complex process that involves scientific traditions, linguistic peculiarities, translators’ subjectivity, readers’ expectations and even the role of the market. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Berichte zur Wissenschafts-Geschichte is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Reinstitutionalisation of science in Belarus took place in the late 1910s - early 1920s. Attempts of its implementation were undertaken by the governments of the Belarussian People’s Republic and the BSSR. The first real results were achieved in the early 1920s, when the Soviet power in 1921 organized the Belarusian State University and the Institute of Belarussian Culture. The latter as the prototype of the future Academy of Sciences attempted to begin its work as a multidisciplinary research institution in 1922. The peculiarity of the scientific and organizational situation was establishment in their composition of scientific-pedagogical and research departments of national minorities. The paper examines the process of learning, especially by Belarussian scientists, one of the aspects of scientific development in the interwar Belarus, namely the national one. In this case, historiographical analysis is made of the organizational history of independent Jewish academic research. The study makes it possible to identify in the Belarussian science a very small number of special publications devoted to the history and scientific activities of Jews and other ethnic groups. Certain unconvincing argumentation is shown in the vast majority of publications. Verification of the researchers’ statements on the basis of archival materials contributed to identification of a number of inaccuracies in their judgments, which very often resulted from incorrect interpretation of small number of facts. Historiographic study of the problem also allowed to develop and specify the number of the previous assertions of Belarussian historiography (personnel, structure of institutions, time of setting up, their heads), as well as to draw a conclusion about the prospects of further indepth study of the history of academic research activities of the national minorities in Belarus in the interwar period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The pessimistic induction over scientific theories (Poincaré in Science and hypothesis, Dover, New York, 1905/1952) holds that present theories will be overthrown as were past theories. The pessimistic induction over scientists (Stanford in Exceeding our grasp: science, history, and the problem of unconceived alternatives, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006) holds that present scientists cannot conceive of future theories just as past scientists could not conceive of present theories. The pessimistic induction over realists (Wray in Synthese 190(18):4321-4330, 2013) holds that present realists are wrong about present theories just as past realists were wrong about past theories. The pessimistic induction over antirealist theories (Park in Organon F 21(1):3-21, 2014) holds that the latest antirealist explanation of the success of science (Lyons in Philos Sci 70(5):891-901, 2003) has hidden problems just as its eight predecessors did. In this paper, I (1) criticize the pessimistic inductions over scientific theories, scientists, and realists, (2) introduce a pessimistic induction over antirealist theories, and then (3) construct two new pessimistic inductions. One is a pessimistic induction over antirealists according to which the author of the latest antirealist proposal cannot see hidden problems with his proposal just as his antirealist predecessors could not see hidden problems with their proposals. The other is the pessimistic induction over pessimists according to which since past pessimists have been wrong about their present scientific theories from the early twentieth century to the early twenty-first century, future pessimists will also be wrong about their present scientific theories from the early twenty-first century to the early twenty-second century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of the New Zealand Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) is examined in terms of the control and supervision of research. The original concept in 1926 was for a department headed by an administrator and tasked with maintaining and administering various research laboratories and investigations, with scientific supervision by outside committees. But external oversight of research was progressively reduced and by the 1970s DSIR had evolved into a department of science undertaking research in its own institutes, led and controlled by its own scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay investigates a hitherto-unexamined collaboration between two of the founders of modern history of science, Henry Guerlac and I. Bernard Cohen, and two economists, Paul Samuelson and Rupert Maclaurin. The arena in which these two disciplines came together was the Bowman Committee, one of the committees that prepared material for Vannevar Bush's Science--The Endless Frontier. The essay shows how their collaboration helped to shape the committee's recommendations, in which different models of science confronted each other. It then shows how, despite this success, the basis for long-term collaboration of economists and historians of science disappeared, because the resulting linear model of science and technology separated the study of scientific and economic progress into noncommunicating boxes . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Collaborations and conflicts between the sciences and the humanities are central to disciplines from digital humanities to archaeology. The exploration of these tensions and synergies in the newly emerging field of technical art history is the focus of this forum. This is also a first step toward the writing of the history of conservation. The disciplinary conflict between science and the humanities in the study of materials and techniques relies on hierarchies of the material and the intellectual and of the hand and the mind. These same epistemic hierarchies are still at work in shaping processes of collaboration between conservators, conservation scientists, and art historians. The forum marks a few signposts that will help us to complete our picture of the long-term development of the study of materials and techniques in art from the eighteenth to the twenty-first century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Scrutinizing the multifaceted relationship between the history of science and the political, economic and cultural transformations of the 1970s, while acknowledging that ‘Cold War [social] science’ has proven to be a fruitful heuristic concept, the paper asks if– in a period decreasing confrontation –there was also a ‘détente [social] science’? First, it presents a short overview of the most significant transformations of the 1970s and sketches if and to what extent developments in the realm of science influenced them or even brought them about. Secondly, the perspective will be turned around. After developing the concept of Cold War Science in greater detail, the paper asks whether the changes of the 1970s influenced the development of the natural and social sciences. In particular, it analyzes their influence on the conceptions of knowledge and expertise that have been described as constitutive elements of Cold War Science. In conclusion, it tries to assess if these changes amount to anything that might be labelled fruitfully as détente science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In the 1970s, the futures field became globalized. This paper shows how perceptions of globality shaped interdisciplinary approaches towards forecasting, planning and thinking about the future. Futures studies were reconceptualized, shifting its perspective from a West‐East, technology‐driven slant towards a global and human‐centred one around 1970. The perceptions and conceptions of globality came out of notions of global interdependence, which emerged from three root sources. The first was the epistemic context of cybernetics and systems analysis, which had shaped the 1950s and 1960s futures studies and had led researchers to aspirations of being able to model the world system. The second, affecting significant sections of the field, was the web of new ecological ideas and their focus on interrelations within the global ecosystem. Third, futures studies took up dependency theories, responding to the rising voice of the global South and new ideas of a New International Economic Order. The futures field was not only influenced by 1970s events, it itself contributed to cultural and social change by enhancing the crisis perceptions and environmentalism of the early years of the decade and by stimulating notions of ‘One World’ solidarity. Through their insistence on the interdependence of environment and development, ‘futurists’ then laid the basis for conceptions of sustainable development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The 1970s mark a critical departure point in the history of science. The rise of the environmental crisis prompted not just new avenues of scientific inquiry but also the integration of scientific expertise into complex interactions with politics and society. This paper investigates the history of the new ‘crisis disciplines’ that emerged in response to explicit fears that the world was on the verge of ecological collapse. Crisis disciplines – a term coined by the conservation biologist Michael Soulé – engage in the urgent and reactionary pursuit of solutions to pressing environmental problems and the evidence scientists bring to bear on their work. Crisis disciplines involve acting ‘before knowing all the facts’, and therefore constitute ‘a mixture of science and art, and their pursuit requires intuition as well as information’. Combined, diverse crisis disciplines constitute a new kind of ‘survival science’, which emerged in the 1970s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The historiography on American science and technology in the 1970s is still small, yet there are already three distinct strands of work: studies of countercultural scientists, portrayed as enacting or advocating ‘groovy’ research; studies of the politically polarized debate pitting conservative and libertarian ‘cornucopianists’ against environmentalists and modelers forecasting resource scarcity; and studies of the early commercialization of technoscience (e.g., biotechnology) that took off in the 1980s. Left out, I argue, are a class of ‘square scientists’ with little sympathy for the counterculture, and yet open to (even eager for) a new kind of science oriented to the same problems activists said they wanted science to solve: pollution, mass transit, housing, biomedicine, disability technologies, pedagogical machines, etc. Square scientists at places like NASA and Texas Instruments adapted military‐industrial‐academic templates to a wide variety of socially ‘relevant’ topics in the 1970s. Yet square scientists still looked to the military‐industrial complex for allies, rather than to countercultural colleagues. This potential middle ground remained excluded – contributing, in large part, to the failure of schemes to reorient US R&D to civilian social problems, and to the invisibility of the squares in today's historical accounts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The decade of the 1970s has recently received a lot of attention in historical research. It is commonly described as ‘a turn of an era’, a time of deep economic, social and cultural transformation. Where do the sciences feature in this picture of the 1970s? This spotlight sheds light on an understudied period of time in the history of science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Brazil in the 1930s, biotypology was a foundational doctrine for national medicine. Proposing a holistic view of the organism, biotypology was embraced as a medical science that could overcome approaches focused on illness rather than on the sick person. Among its various meanings, biotypology was described as ‘the science of the individual’. Its main scientific practices consisted of morphological, physiological and psychological evaluations that were determined through calculations and statistics. Biotypological studies operated beyond the realm of medical practice, informing eugenic, racial and national identity debates in Brazil. Biotypologists created systems for the bodily classification of Brazilians, established patterns of normality, and characterised individuals in biological terms. Yet biotypology also emphasized bodily norms derived from studying the collective to analyse the health of individuals in doctors’ clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information on an open meeting organized by the science committee Komitetu Historii Nauki in Warsaw, Poland on April 14, 2016 is presented. Topics discussed in the conference include science and technology in Poland in 19th century, scientific development after World War II and commemoration of historian Aleksander Gieysztor.

Michael Polanyi (1891-1976) was a Hungarian-born British physician turned physical chemist turned philosopher. His milestone epistemological treatise Personal Knowledge followed his substantial discoveries in adsorption studies, X-ray crystallography, materials science, and the mechanism of chemical reactions. Michael Polanyi was one of the last polymaths and his teachings impacted the world views of other outstanding contributors to twentieth century science and culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 'material turn' or the history of things has become a prominent focus in the history of life science of the long eighteenth century. The reassessment of eighteenth-century science since the 1990s has given particular prominence to medicine and the life sciences. Eighteenth-century anatomists and naturalists studied, collected, imitated, and represented many kinds of natural things, from the human body to trees. This article considers a variety of new approaches to material culture, museums, and collecting among historians of science since 2000, focusing on natural history and anatomy. The historiography of objects invokes a sensory history of seeing and touching, and a global history of movement across time, place, and culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My life has been framed by the two-cultures debate. A scientific education, good but narrow, led me into history of science just as anxiety about specialisation opened opportunities for ‘bridge’ subjects, and History and Philosophy of Science seemed just that bridge. My DPhil thesis (1964), on the reception of chemical atomic theory in the nineteenth century, led to a new lectureship at Durham that involved giving courses right across the different faculties, and close, stimulating involvement with other institutions where it was also being taught and researched; with the business of examining, reviewing, editing, and publishing; with the various societies set up to promote history of science; and with scientific societies like the Royal Society, the British Association for the Advancement of Science, and the Royal Society of Chemistry, finding science losing public esteem, and becoming interested in their past and how it might promote understanding and enthusiasm in the present. Encounters with historians of science, technology, and medicine at home and abroad, with coal miners and with museum curators, all wrestling with very different histories, indicated that Snow's ‘two cultures’ were a feature especially of 1950s Britain, that cultures were deeply divided in all sorts of ways, and that the social history of science was as important as its intellectual history. So over time I found myself teaching course s, and writing, on science and religion in the nineteenth century as well as on Butterfield and Hall's ‘Scientific Revolution’ that had dominated the subject in the 1960s and the ‘Second Scientific Revolution’ that had excited young Turks of my generation. Finally, I launched a course on Two Cultures as a historical phenomenon, focussing upon science, its developing institutions, reception, and place in the culture of the nineteenth-century Age of Science. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

When it comes to knowledge about the scientific pasts that might have been – the so-called ‘counterfactual’ history of science – historians can either debate its possibility or get on with the job. Taking the latter course means re-engaging with some of the most general questions about science. It can also lead to fresh insights into why particular episodes unfolded as they did and not otherwise. Drawing on recent research into the controversy over Mendelism in the early twentieth century, this address reports and reflects on a novel teaching experiment conducted in order to find out what biology and its students might be like now had the controversy gone differently. The results suggest a number of new options: for the collection of evidence about the counterfactual scientific past, for the development of collaborations between historians of science and science educators, for the cultivation of more productive relationships between scientists and their forebears, and for heightened self-awareness about the curiously counterfactual business of being historical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines some aspects of the reception of French Spiritism and psychical research in twentieth century Iran: its promotion by Iranian modernist intellectuals before the Second World War, and its appropriation by Shi‘i Muslim ‘ulama in the 1940s and 1960s. Spiritism appealed to those intellectuals and scholars who sought to reconcile their commitments to science with their religious longings and dedication to moral reform. In comparing these encounters with spirit communication, I show that the adoption of putatively scientific claims in contexts that professional scientists usually disavow can be about much more than strategic appropriation and attempts to justify preexisting doctrines. They also allow us to understand science's power to mold the moral subjectivities of reformers through selective absorption into long-continuous traditions of virtue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines scientific developments in China and India by comparing and contrasting the enterprises of natural history during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. From this perspective, the cases of China and India shared some similarities, but also exhibited important differences with respect to the conditions, ideologies, personnel, processes and strategies in scientific development. Two very large countries, with much left unexplored, attracted broad scientific interest in their flora and fauna from the early modern period; the interest intensified in the nineteenth century because of increasing accessibility to their interiors. However, the different historical situations that involved empire, nation, professionalization, geography and domestic and international politics helped shape the respective trajectories of scientific development in the two countries. Yet, despite their differences, China and India shared important similarities in the co-production of science and state, the global hierarchy of knowledge production, and the coloniality of power relations. This historical complexity also represented an important aspect of the global history of science, one that still bears poignancy and resonance in the contemporary world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Trabajos y Comunicaciones is the property of Universidad Nacional de La Plata and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In 1971 Lord (Victor) Rothschild published his report for the government, The organisation and management of government R&D, and Sir Peter Medawar launched a campaign for the election of Sir Karl Popper to Fellowship of the Royal Society. We explore these two developments in the contexts of the then current views of the role and purpose of science, and their underpinning philosophy. Although the political battle was won by Rothschild, resulting in major changes to the funding and management of applied R&D, we argue that, despite this, Medawar's campaign for Popper provided an embattled science community with a philosophical basis for defending pure research and the unity of basic and applied science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From 1930 to 1937 Lancelot Hogben FRS occupied the Chair of Social Biology at the London School of Economics and Political Science. According to standard histories of this appointment, he and R. A. Fisher FRS both applied for the position, but Hogben was selected over Fisher. The episode has received attention in large part because of the later prominence of the two figures involved. The surviving archival records, however, tell a remarkably different story. Neither Fisher nor Hogben was ever an official candidate for the chair. Indeed, Fisher seems not to have applied for the position at all, and Hogben was approached only behind the scenes of the official search. The purpose of this paper is to correct and complete the history of this episode. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a report from a November 14, 2014 conference in Aachen, Germany on the history of technology and science in World War I. Topics of presentations delivered included the use of water as a source of motive power as a result of coal shortages in the war, alleged deficiencies in the distribution of maps and cartography materials by the Imperial German army, and the portrayal of the war in motion pictures and television.

Copyright of Dialogos (14159945) is the property of Universidade Estadual de Maringa and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

A standard account of how the sciences developed around 1900 tends to identify specialization and an increasingly strong pragmatic orientation as the driving forces shaping the sciences in this period. We want to oppose this account: Focussing on a number of inaugural lectures delivered at Dutch universities around 1900, we emphasize the prominence of integrative ideals, and the equally notable absence of references to specialization. The notion of unity upon which these ideals are based is extremely rich: the unity of a person, unity of education and research and unity within the system of the sciences all are aimed at simultaneously. Remarkably, this attitude is not a reactionary one, but is intimately related precisely to the emergence of new disciplines. The main goal of this paper is to establish the presence and the relevance, across the disciplines, of these integrative ideals. This leads to a number of important questions that need to be asked with respect to the dynamics of science in this period: how can the relevant notions of unity and harmony be conceptualized? and – a question not to be pursued here – how, then, did the ideal of specialization become as dominant as it appears to be today? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The transnational approach of the science and technology studies (S&TS) abandons the nation as a unit of analysis in order to understand the development of science history. It also abandons Euro-US-centred narratives in order to explain the role of international collaborative networks and the circulation of knowledge, people, artefacts and scientific practices. It is precisely under this perspective that the development of genetics and radiobiology in Mexico shall be analyzed, together with the pioneering work of the Mexican physician-turned-geneticist Alfonso León de Garay who spent two years in the Galton Laboratory in London under the supervision of Lionel Penrose. Upon his return de Garay funded the Genetics and Radiobiology Program of the National Commission of Nuclear Energy based on local needs and the aim of working beyond geographical limitations to thus facilitate the circulation of knowledge, practices and people. The three main lines of research conducted in the years after its foundation that were in line with international projects while responding to the national context were, first, cytogenetic studies of certain abnormalities, and the cytogenetics and anthropological studies of the Olympic Games held in Mexico in 1968; second, the study of the effects of radiation on hereditary material; and third, the study of population genetics in Drosophila and in Mexican indigenous groups. The program played a key role in reshaping the scientific careers of Mexican geneticists, and in transferring locally sourced research into broader networks. This case shows the importance of international collaborative networks and circulation in the constitution of national scientific elites, and also shows the national and transnational concerns that shaped local practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on science and technology during the Cold War. Topics discussed include several historical research studies on science during the Cold War period; the social history of this period; the role of international and bi-national agencies created in this period; and how these transnational agencies of patronage played a crucial role in the internationalization and standardization of science. It is suggested that transnational history could reconfigure the history of science by highlighting places and actors that remained invisible in national and Western-centered narratives.

The Peking Man fossils discovered at Zhoukoudian in north-east China in the 1920s and 1930s were some of the most extensive palaeoanthropological finds of the twentieth century. This article examines their publicization and discussion in Britain, where they were engaged with by some of the world's leading authorities in human evolution, and a media and public highly interested in human-origins research. This international link – simultaneously promoted by scientists in China and in Britain itself – reflected wider debates on international networks; the role of science in the modern world; and changing definitions of race, progress and human nature. This article illustrates how human-origins research was an important means of binding these areas together and presenting scientific work as simultaneously authoritative and credible, but also evoking mystery and adventurousness. Examining this illustrates important features of contemporary views of both science and human development, showing not only the complexities of contemporary regard for the international and public dynamics of scientific research, but wider concerns over human nature, which oscillated between optimistic notions of unity and progress and pessimistic ones of essential differences and misdirected development. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article aims to deepen our understanding of the transatlantic circulation of scientific ideas during the Cold War by looking at the importation of behavioralism in European political science. It analyses the social, institutional, and intellectual dynamics that led to the creation, in 1970, of a transnational organization that aimed to promote behavioralism in Europe: the European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR). Using qualitative material drawn from archives and interviews, the study shows that the creation of the ECPR was the joint product of academic, scientific, and political rivalries. It argues that the founding of the organization served a purpose for several agents (chiefly, academic entrepreneurs and philanthropic foundations) who pursued different strategies in different social fields in the context of the Cold War. More broadly, it suggests that the postwar development of the social sciences and the circulation of scientific ideas are best accounted for by mapping sociological interactions between scientific fields and neighboring social spheres. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Before the establishment of the Cenozoic Research Laboratory (Xinshengdai yanjiushi) in 1929, paleoanthropological research in China was mainly in the hands of foreigners, individual explorers as well as organized teams. This paper describes the development of paleoanthropology in China in the 1920s and 1930s and its transformation from the international phase to an indigenized one. It focuses on the international elite scientist network in metropolitan Beijing whose activities and discoveries led to such transformation. The bond between members of the network was built on shared scientific devotion, joint field experience, and social activities. However, such scientific internationalism was not immune from imperialistic and nationalistic interests and competition as most members of the network also belonged to institutions of the dominant hegemonic powers, such as the French Paleontological Mission and the American Museum of Natural History, operating by the logic of international system of imperialism. While these foreign institutions enjoyed relatively unrestricted access to the Chinese frontier and Mongolia in the early 20th century to discover and collect for the establishment of what they saw as universal scientific knowledge, in the late 1920s rising Chinese and Mongolian nationalisms began to interpret these activities as violations to their national sovereignty. The idea of establishing a “Chinese” institute to carry out paleoanthropological research in China took shape in such milieu. This paper highlights the entanglement between scientific internationalism, imperialism, nationalism in China in the early 20th century and the complicated process of knowledge formation at various national and personal levels. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The purpose of this paper is to present the basic contributions of Physics in the development of Microelectronics, a science field found at the edge between Physics and Electronics. We will show the road followed by the 20th century science and technique, beginning with 1900, from the rise of quantum theory, elaborated by Max Plank, continuing with the invention of bipolar transistor, up to the manufacturing of the first microprocessor and of the first integrated memory, this way opening the way to the construction of the first personal computer. In this paper, we will present a short review of the main Physics chapters which contributed to the development of the Microelectronics field, of the main theoretical concepts and of physical models which led to the development of the semiconductor devices manufacturing technologies industry. We will present, from the point of view physical phenomena and of modeling, the basic processes in integrated-circuit fabrication: oxidation, epitaxial growth, ion implantation and solid-state diffusion. We will describe the physical models of these processes, models which led to the design of the process flows from Microelectronics industry. These physical models are also used in simulation software of technological processes. For two of the basic processes, oxidation and solid-state diffusion, we will shortly describe the characterization methods, emphasizing once more the role of Physics in Microelectronics field. We will also refer, using examples, to the main process flows used in integrated circuits structures manufacturing that led to the development of Microelectronics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In histories of twentieth-century Darwinism few developments loom larger than the turn-of-the-century rediscovery of Gregor Mendel's genetic research and the later application of Mendelian principles in constructing so-called Neo-Darwinism. Virtually unknown is the equally enthusiastic embrace of Mendel by antievolutionists, who as early as 1917 adopted the Austrian monk as their most celebrated scientific hero, a status he continues to hold down to the present day. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After the rediscovery of Mendel's laws of heredity in 1900, the biologists who began studying heredity, variation, and evolution using the new Mendelian methodology-performing controlled hybrid crosses and statistically analyzing progeny to note the factorial basis of characters-made great progress. By 1910, the validity of Mendelism was widely recognized and the field William Bateson christened 'genetics' was complemented by the chromosome theory of heredity of T. H. Morgan and his group in the United States. Historians, however, have largely overlooked an important factor in the early establishment of Mendelism and genetics: the large number of women who contributed to the various research groups. This article examines the social, economic, and disciplinary context behind this new wave of women's participation in science and describes the work of women Mendelians and geneticists employed at three leading experimental research institutes, 1900-1940. It argues that the key to more women working in science was the access to higher education and the receptivity of emerging interdisciplinary fields such as genetics to utilize the expertise of women workers, which not only advanced the discipline but also provided new opportunities for women's employment in science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the first half of the twentieth century, dramatic developments in physics came to be viewed as revolutionary, apparently requiring a complete overthrow of previous theories. British physicists were keen to promote quantum physics and relativity theory as exciting and new, but the rhetoric of revolution threatened science's claim to stability and its prestigious connections with Isaac Newton. This was particularly problematic in the first decades of the twentieth century, within the broader context of political turmoil, world war, and the emergence of modernist art and literature. This article examines how physicists responded to their cultural and political environment and worked to maintain disciplinary connections with Isaac Newton, emphasizing the importance of both the old and the new. In doing so they attempted to make the physics 'revolution' more palatable to a British public seeking a sense of permanence in a rapidly changing world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The centennial has revived attention for the First World War. Because of the Netherlands' neutral position, the influence of the horrendous war in this nation has long been qualified as marginal. In the last two decades, this perspective has gradually changed and several studies were published on developments in the Netherlands in 1914-1918. In these studies the Great War has either been understood as a watershed moment in Dutch history or, adversely, as a continuation of previous times. In this special issue, we present five case-studies of the influence of the First World War on various scientific cultures in the Netherlands. These studies indicate that this interaction transcends the dichotomous image of either continuity or discontinuity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The spread of the modern computer is assumed to have been a smooth process of technology transfer. This view relies on an assessment of the open circulation of knowledge ensured by the US and British governments in the early post-war years. This article presents new historical evidence that question this view. At the centre of the article lies the ill-fated establishment of the UNESCO International Computation Centre. The project was initially conceived in 1946 to provide advanced computation capabilities to scientists of all nations. It soon became a prize sought by Western European countries like the Netherlands and Italy seeking to speed up their own national research programs. Nonetheless, as the article explains, the US government's limitations on the research function of the future centre resulted in the withdrawal of European support for the project. These limitations illustrate the extent to which US foreign science policy could operate as (stealth) industrial policy to secure a competitive technological advantage and the prospects of US manufacturers in a future European market. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The Van der Waals Laboratory for Molecular Physics of the University of Amsterdam was founded before World War II by A.M.J.F. Michels (1889-1969). This paper describes how after World War II Michels was also the founder of the Institute for Molecular Physics at the University of Maryland. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]