History and Technology

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

History and Technology This article was downloaded by:[Forman, Paul] [Forman, Paul] On: 23 April 2007 Access Details: [subscription number 777307305] Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK History and Technology An International Journal Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713643058 The Primacy of Science in Modernity, of Technology in Postmodernity, and of Ideology in the History of Technology To cite this Article: , 'The Primacy of Science in Modernity, of Technology in Postmodernity, and of Ideology in the History of Technology', History and Technology, 23:1, 1 - 152 To link to this article: DOI: 10.1080/07341510601092191 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07341510601092191 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. © Taylor and Francis 2007 History and Technology Vol. 23, No. 1/2, March/June 2007, pp. 1–152 The Primacy of Science in Modernity, of Technology in Postmodernity, and of Ideology in the History of Technology Paul Forman TaylorGHAT_A_209163.sgm10.1080/07341510601092191History0734-1512Original2007231/2000000March/[email protected] and& and Article Francis (print)/1477-2620Francis Technology Ltd2007 (online) Downloaded By: [Forman, Paul] At: 17:39 23 April 2007 The abrupt reversal of culturally ascribed primacy in the science–technology relation- ship—namely, from the primacy of science relative to technology prior to circa 1980, to the primacy of technology relative to science since about that date—is proposed as a demarcator of postmodernity from modernity: modernity is when ‘science’ could, and often did, denote technology too; postmodernity is when science is subsumed under tech- nology. In support of that demarcation criterion, I evidence the breadth and strength of modernity’s presupposition of the primacy of science to and for technology by showing its preposterous hold upon social theorists—Marx, Veblen, Dewey—whose principles logi- cally required the reverse, viz. the primacy of practice; upon 19th and 20th century engi- neers and industrialists, social actors whose practical interests likewise required the reverse; and upon the principal theorizers in the 1970s of the role of science in late 20th century technology and society. The reversal in primacy between science and technology ca 1980 came too unexpectedly, too quickly, and, above all, too unreflectively to have resulted from the weight of evidence or the force of logic. Rather, it was a concomitant of the onset of postmodernity. Oddly, historians of technology have remained almost wholly unacknowledging of postmodernity’s epochal elevation of the cultural standing of the subject of their studies, and, specifically, have ignored technology’s elevation relative to science. This I attribute to the ideological character of that discipline, and, specifically, to its strategy of ignoration of science. Keywords: Technology as Applied Science; Science as Technology; Revolts Against Science; Modern; Postmodern; Heidegger; Marx; Sombart; Bukharin; Veblen; Dewey; Mumford; Lorenzen; Daniel Bell; Lyotard; Erlanger Schule; Starnberger Schule; Finalization; Romanticism; Lebensphilosophie; Technological Determinism Paul Forman is a curator at the Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC 20013-7012. E-mail: [email protected] ISSN 0734–1512 (print)/ISSN 1477–2620 (online) © 2007 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/07341510601092191 2 P. Forman Liberation of our conception of technology from the functional dependence and cultural inferiority implied by ‘applied science’ was a principal constitutive program of the discipline of the history of technology, and so it has remained through four decades to the present day. When the historians of technology first began to revolt against ‘the linear model’ and its view of science as originative source, as unmoved mover, of tech- nological progress, they were setting themselves against prejudices deeply entrenched in modern culture.1 Meanwhile, however, the times have been achanging. To campaign today against the linear model is to throw oneself against a door that has been wide open for two decades. In the epochal global transformation from modernity to post- modernity that has been taking place in recent decades, technology has acquired, beginning about 1980, the cultural primacy that science had been enjoying for two centuries world-wide, and in the West for two millennia. Of this postmodern reversal of primacy between science and technology there is no more apposite evidence than the shift of the center of interest in all varieties of ‘science studies’ from science to technology. That shift began about 25 years ago, and today, if one asks a historian or sociologist or philosopher of science what they are working on, odds are they will describe an inquiry at the center of which is technology. This is true even also of those who are now old enough to collect their pensions, and who, conse- Downloaded By: [Forman, Paul] At: 17:39 23 April 2007 quently, having begun their scholarly careers at a time when science’s primacy was unquestioned, could not then have imagined ending it oriented as they are toward technology.2 This turnabout has come about because we historians and sociologists and epistemologists have become so largely postmodern—not postmodernists neces- sarily or even generally, but anima adapted to postmodernity.3 In modernity, the cultural rank of science was elevated by that epoch’s most basic cultural presuppositions—not merely the presupposition of the superiority of theory to practice, but more importantly the elevation of the public over the private and the disinterested over the interested, and, more importantly still, the belief that the means sanctify the ends, that adherence to proper means is the best guarantee of a ‘truly good’ outcome. Today, on the contrary, technology is the beneficiary, and science the maleficiary, of our pragmatic-utilitarian subordination of means to ends, and of the concomitants of that predominant cultural presupposition, notably, disbelief in disin- terestedness and condescension toward conceptual structures. Some evidence of this unprecedentedly high cultural standing of technology in recent decades is presented in Section I of this paper. More particularly, I argue there that only a sudden and drastic shift ca 1980 in cultural presuppositions could explain the evident inclination across the scholarly spectrum—from philosophers to sociologists to scientists—to ascribe to technology that primacy in role and rank that previously all had ascribed to science. Did all ascribe such primacy to science prior to postmodernity? In order to establish the fundamentality of the postmodern reori- entation in cultural commitments, it is necessary to show that in the two centuries, at least, prior to ca 1980 the primacy of science to and for technology was a firm fixture in nearly everyone’s thought, regardless of their philosophical commitments or social interests. Thus Section II, the bulk of this paper, is devoted to making out that case. History and Technology 3 That effort is needful as there does not exist, to my knowledge, any scholarly exposition of the fact of the near universal belief in the primacy of science to and for technology prior to postmodernity. The absence of such an exposition is surely due in good part to the fact that a generation ago, when we now pensionable historians and sociologists of science began our careers by taking science as our subject, we would have regarded a proof of science’s primacy as pointlessly pedantic. The transposition of our point of view has meanwhile taken place so fundamentally and so complacently that today a presupposed primacy of science to technology is conceivable only as a prepos- terous, even malicious, mythology.4 Although the primacy that science enjoyed in modernity—a primacy not merely with respect to technology, but in cultural standing quite generally—came to appear preposterous only through the perspective enjoined by postmodernity upon layman and scholar alike, not everyone in modernity approved of the fact that science enjoyed such primacy. Of that I take note repeatedly in the course of my exposition. Among the malcontents were the adherents of the emerging discipline of the history of technology, who in the course of the 1970s rejected the primacy of science and took as program- matic objective liberation of technology, and of themselves, from subordination to science. I show in Section III that as their principal means of effecting that end, histo- Downloaded By: [Forman, Paul] At: 17:39 23 April 2007 rians
Recommended publications
  • History of Science (HIST SCI) 1
    History of Science (HIST SCI) 1 HIST SCI 133 — BIOLOGY AND SOCIETY, 1950 - TODAY HISTORY OF SCIENCE (HIST 3 credits. From medical advancements to environmental crises and global food SCI) shortages, the life sciences are implicated in some of the most pressing social issues of our time. This course explores events in the history of biology from the mid-twentieth century to today, and examines how HIST SCI/ENVIR ST/HISTORY 125 — GREEN SCREEN: ENVIRONMENTAL developments in this science have shaped and are shaped by society. In PERSPECTIVES THROUGH FILM the first unit, we investigate the origins of the institutions, technologies, 3 credits. and styles of practice that characterize contemporary biology, such From Teddy Roosevelt's 1909 African safari to the Hollywood blockbuster as the use of mice as "model organisms" for understanding human King Kong, from the world of Walt Disney to The March of the Penguins, diseases. The second unit examines biological controversies such as the cinema has been a powerful force in shaping public and scientific introduction of genetically modified plants into the food supply. The final understanding of nature throughout the twentieth and twenty-first unit asks how biological facts and theories have been and continue to be century. How can film shed light on changing environmental ideas and used as a source for understanding ourselves. Enroll Info: None beliefs in American thought, politics, and culture? And how can we come Requisites: None to see and appreciate contested issues of race, class, and gender in Course Designation: Breadth - Either Humanities or Social Science nature on screen? This course will explore such questions as we come Level - Elementary to understand the role of film in helping to define the contours of past, L&S Credit - Counts as Liberal Arts and Science credit in L&S present, and future environmental visions in the United States, and their Repeatable for Credit: No impact on the real world struggles of people and wildlife throughout the Last Taught: Spring 2021 world.
    [Show full text]
  • Fire Bow Drill
    Making Fire With The Bow Drill When you are first learning bow-drill fire-making, you must make conditions and your bow drill set such that the chance of getting a coal is the greatest. If you do not know the feeling of a coal beginning to be born then you will never be able to master the more difficult scenarios. For this it is best to choose the “easiest woods” and practice using the set in a sheltered location such as a garage or basement, etc. Even if you have never gotten a coal before, it is best to get the wood from the forest yourself. Getting it from a lumber yard is easy but you learn very little. Also, getting wood from natural sources ensures you do not accidentally get pressure-treated wood which, when caused to smoulder, is highly toxic. Here are some good woods for learning with (and good for actual survival use too): ► Eastern White Cedar ► Staghorn Sumac ► Most Willows ► Balsam Fir ► Aspens and Poplars ► Basswood ► Spruces There are many more. These are centered more on the northeastern forest communities of North America. A good tree identification book will help you determine potential fire-making woods. Also, make it a common practice to feel and carve different woods when you are in the bush. A good way to get good wood for learning on is to find a recently fallen branch or trunk that is relatively straight and of about wrist thickness or bigger. Cut it with a saw. It is best if the wood has recently fallen off the tree.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of New Technologies on the Development of Architecture Julia Walker
    The Impact of New Technologies on the Development of Architecture Julia Walker A view of the history of architectural technology can help us understand the stakes involved in the construction of buildings of different periods, styles, and structural systems. It can also help clarify why certain forms arose at particular moments in history, at specific sites, and under specific conditions. In all eras and geographical locations, technological innovation has influenced the development of architecture. This innovation has taken various forms—sometimes manifesting as new materials, either manmade or natural, and sometimes as new design tools or structural methods. The practical necessities of any given moment determine the technology that will arise to suit these demands, whether it relates to shelter, fortification, or religious ideas. Technology has been used to solve practical problems, but also to create symbolic orders, such as the assertion of human will over natural forces that arose in prehistoric building. Since antiquity, architects have stressed the significance of such knowledge to their field; the Roman architect and theorist Marcus Vitruvius Pollio (see box text on p. 174), for example, was trained as an engineer and frequently underscored the importance of technological understanding to the execution of architecture. In fact, we see this theme repeated in architectural theory across the globe. The Manasara-silpasastra, a seventh- century Indian building manual named for its author (see box text on p. 273), and the Chinese treatise Yingzao Fashi by Li Jie, a Song Dynasty book of architectural standards (see box text on p. 435), likewise argue that no architect can prosper without a thorough technical education.
    [Show full text]
  • MIRROR MIRROR the Mind’S Mirror FILMS Seaglass 4 Restaurant 5 Outdoor Exhibits with Zarinah Agnew 7:30 P.M
    AFTER DARK AFTER DARK SCHEDULE MAP PRESENTATIONS ACTIVITIES Upper Level Bay Observatory Gallery and Terrace 6 Observing Landscapes Mirrors in Technology and Art Through the Looking Glass Mirrors in Technology and Art With Sebastian Martin With the Explainers 6 With Sebastian Martin 6:30–8:30 p.m. | Bay Observatory Gallery 6:30–9:30 p.m. | Central Gallery 6:30–8:30 p.m. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2015 A Reflection on Mirrors Light Boxes and Anamorphic Mirrors The History of Mirrors 6:00—10:00 P.M. With Ron Hipschman With Explorables With Massimo Mazzotti 7:00 and 9:00 p.m. 7:00–10:00 p.m. | Central Gallery Main Level 8:30 p.m. Phyllis C. Wattis Webcast Studio BAR North Gallery MIRROR MIRROR The Mind’s Mirror FILMS SeaGlass 4 Restaurant 5 Outdoor Exhibits With Zarinah Agnew 7:30 p.m. | Kanbar Forum On Reflection East Gallery 9:00 p.m. | Kanbar Forum 4 Living Systems The History of Mirrors East With Massimo Mazzotti Corridor Contemplando la Ciudad (2005, 4 min.) Central Gallery 8:30 p.m. | Bay Observatory Gallery by Angela Reginato 5 3 Seeing & Listening Visions of a City (1978, 8 min.) by Lawrence Jordan A Reflection on Mirrors INSTALLATIONS BAR 3 With Ron Hipschman Suspended 2 (2005, 5 min.) by Amy Hicks Wattis 7:00 and 9:00 p.m. The Infinity Boxes Webcast Phyllis C. Wattis Webcast Studio Studio By Matt Elson Pier 15 (2013, 4 min.) by Michael Rudnick 6:00–10:00 p.m. | Central Gallery The Infinity Boxes By Matt Elson Visible Spectres 6:00–10:00 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophical Rhetoric in Early Quantum Mechanics, 1925-1927
    b1043_Chapter-2.4.qxd 1/27/2011 7:30 PM Page 319 b1043 Quantum Mechanics and Weimar Culture FA 319 Philosophical Rhetoric in Early Quantum Mechanics 1925–27: High Principles, Cultural Values and Professional Anxieties Alexei Kojevnikov* ‘I look on most general reasoning in science as [an] opportunistic (success- or unsuccessful) relationship between conceptions more or less defined by other conception[s] and helping us to overlook [danicism for “survey”] things.’ Niels Bohr (1919)1 This paper considers the role played by philosophical conceptions in the process of the development of quantum mechanics, 1925–1927, and analyses stances taken by key participants on four main issues of the controversy (Anschaulichkeit, quantum discontinuity, the wave-particle dilemma and causality). Social and cultural values and anxieties at the time of general crisis, as identified by Paul Forman, strongly affected the language of the debate. At the same time, individual philosophical positions presented as strongly-held principles were in fact flexible and sometimes reversible to almost their opposites. One can understand the dynamics of rhetorical shifts and changing strategies, if one considers interpretational debates as a way * Department of History, University of British Columbia, 1873 East Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 1Z1; [email protected]. The following abbreviations are used: AHQP, Archive for History of Quantum Physics, NBA, Copenhagen; AP, Annalen der Physik; HSPS, Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences; NBA, Niels Bohr Archive, Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen; NW, Die Naturwissenschaften; PWB, Wolfgang Pauli, Wissenschaftlicher Briefwechsel mit Bohr, Einstein, Heisenberg a.o., Band I: 1919–1929, ed. A. Hermann, K.V.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Inventors of the Ancient World Preliminary Syllabus & Course Outline
    CLA 46 Dr. Patrick Hunt Spring Quarter 2014 Stanford Continuing Studies http://www.patrickhunt.net Great Inventors Of the Ancient World Preliminary Syllabus & Course Outline A Note from the Instructor: Homo faber is a Latin description of humans as makers. Human technology has been a long process of adapting to circumstances with ingenuity, and while there has been gradual progress, sometimes technology takes a downturn when literacy and numeracy are lost over time or when humans forget how to maintain or make things work due to cataclysmic change. Reconstructing ancient technology is at times a reminder that progress is not always guaranteed, as when Classical civilization crumbled in the West, but the history of technology is a fascinating one. Global revolutions in technology occur in cycles, often when necessity pushes great minds to innovate or adapt existing tools, as happened when humans first started using stone tools and gradually improved them, often incrementally, over tens of thousands of years. In this third course examining the greats of the ancient world, we take a close look at inventions and their inventors (some of whom might be more legendary than actually known), such as vizier Imhotep of early dynastic Egypt, who is said to have built the first pyramid, and King Gudea of Lagash, who is credited with developing the Mesopotamian irrigation canals. Other somewhat better-known figures are Glaucus of Chios, a metallurgist sculptor who possibly invented welding; pioneering astronomer Aristarchus of Samos; engineering genius Archimedes of Siracusa; Hipparchus of Rhodes, who made celestial globes depicting the stars; Ctesibius of Alexandria, who invented hydraulic water organs; and Hero of Alexandria, who made steam engines.
    [Show full text]
  • SAFE USE of UTILITY KNIVES Utility and Precision (E.G
    SAFE USE OF UTILITY KNIVES Utility and precision (e.g. X-acto) knives are very useful tools for a variety of tasks. Safe work practices must be followed when using these tools to avoid injury and/or damage to property. These simple tools are frequently misused and result in injury or damage to property. Safety Tips Determine if you are using the right tool for the job. There are many different types of blades and utility knives for different purposes. In some cases, a completely different tool may be more appropriate. For example, a hose cutter is a better option when compared to a knife when cutting hose. A saw may be more appropriate for cutting thick material. Always inspect the tool before using it. The blade must be sharp. Wear safety glasses when using a cutting tool. The blade may brake and fly away from the work surface. Use the knife as it was intended. Don’t use it to pry or turn screws. Use a straight edge when attempting to cut a straight line. When positioning and using the knife, ensure the cutting path is not in the direction of your body or other hand. Rest the workpiece on a firm and stable surface, never on your lap or in the palm of your hand. Utilize clamps when possible to hold the workpiece instead of your hands. Consider using cut resistant gloves for added protection. Keep the blade covered when not in use or when in storage. Discard used blades in an appropriate container. Always store and transport knives with the blade retracted fully or with a guard in place.
    [Show full text]
  • Writing and City Life
    29 THEME2 writing and city life CITY life began in Mesopotamia*, the land between the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers that is now part of the Republic of Iraq. Mesopotamian civilisation is known for its prosperity, city life, its voluminous and rich literature and its mathematics and astronomy. Mesopotamia’s writing system and literature spread to the eastern Mediterranean, northern *The name Syria, and Turkey after 2000 BCE, so that the kingdoms of Mesopotamia is that entire region were writing to one another, and to the derived from the Pharaoh of Egypt, in the language and script of Mesopotamia. Greek words mesos, Here we shall explore the connection between city life and writing, and then look at some outcomes of a sustained meaning middle, tradition of writing. and potamos, In the beginning of recorded history, the land, mainly the meaning river. urbanised south (see discussion below), was called Sumer and Akkad. After 2000 BCE, when Babylon became an important city, the term Babylonia was used for the southern region. From about 1100 BCE, when the Assyrians established their kingdom in the north, the region became known as Assyria. The first known language of the land was Sumerian. It was gradually replaced by Akkadian around 2400 BCE when Akkadian speakers arrived. This language flourished till about Alexander’s time (336-323 BCE), with some regional changes occurring. From 1400 BCE, Aramaic also trickled in. This language, similar to Hebrew, became widely spoken after 1000 BCE. It is still spoken in parts of Iraq. Archaeology in Mesopotamia began in the 1840s. At one or two sites (including Uruk and Mari, which we discuss below), excavations continued for decades.
    [Show full text]
  • MATERIALS for KEY ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES Materials for Key Enabling Technologies
    MATERIALS FOR KEY ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES Materials for Key Enabling Technologies This report is the result of a joint effort of the European Materials Research Society (E-MRS, Strasbourg, www.european-mrs.com) and of the Materials Science and Engineering Expert Committee (MatSEEC) of the European Science Foundation (ESF, www.esf.org/matseec). The report has been prepared on the occasion of the Key Enabling Technologies (KETs) initiative launched by the European Commission to give an overview of the current status and recommendations on the role Materials Science and Engineering should play in Europe for key enabling technologies. The report has been edited by Hans Richter, Vice-President of E-MRS, based on the contributions of several members. Thanks are due to Ana Helman, scientific secretary of MatSEEC, Manfred Aigringer, project manager of Gesellschaft zur Förderung von Wissenschaft und WirtschaftGFWW ( ), Hilary Crichton (ESF), and John R. Blizzard (E-MRS) for performing the final compilation, editing and reviewing work. Francesco Priolo Guenther Bauer E-MRS President MatSEEC Chair 21 June 2011 – Second edition Edited by: H. Richter, E-MRS Vice-President With the collaboration of: N. Alford, J. Amouroux, D. Barbier, G. Bauer, A. Borg, J. P. Condé, A. González-Elipe, H. G. Grimmeiss, A. Jäger-Waldau, D. J. Jarvis, T. Lippert, S. Maier, H. J. Muessig, E. Olsson, J. Perriere, L. Pfitzner, F. Priolo, H. Richter, A-C. Ritschkoff, P. Siffert, A. Slaoui, C. Vahlas Cover image: Fibre optics © Science Photo Library/Cosmos CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary 3 2. The Global Market and the EU Position for each KET 5 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historical Turn in the Philosophy of Science
    THE HISTORICAL TURN IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE 1 Developments in the History of Science The history of science has a long history. Aristotle’s scientific works are prefaced by historical account of those sciences, and this model persisted through medieval times until and including the rise of modern science in the era of the scientific revolution. Joseph Priestley, for example, entitled two of his books of pioneering research The History and Present State of Electricity and The History and Present State of Discov- eries Relating to Vision, Light, and Colours. For many such early modern authors the history of science serves as a propaedeutic. William Whewell’s A History of the Induc- tive Sciences (1857) is regarded as the first genuinely modern work of the history of science. Even so, Whewell’s scholarship has an extra-historical purpose, which was to furnish the materials against which a satisfactory philosophy of science could be con- structed. While Whewell rejected a Leibnizian logic of discovery, he did nonetheless believe that general principles of scientific inference could be uncovered by careful consideration of the history of scientific research. Whewell’s approach was followed by several early positivists, notably, Mach, Ostwald, and Duhem. Nonetheless, as positivism developed philosophically it also became more ahis- torical. Carnap’s programme of a priori inductive logic was premised on a distinction between a context of discovery and a context of justification. The former concerned the process of coming up with an hypothesis, whereas the latter concerns its justification relative to the evidence. The former would be the province of psychology, although it may depend so much on details of individual biography that few general principles may be derived even a posteriori.
    [Show full text]
  • COMMUNICATIONS: the Smart Grid's Enabling Technology
    NRECA-DOE SMART GRID DEMONSTRATION PROJECT | DE-OE0000222 COMMUNICATIONS: The Smart Grid’s Enabling Technology FINAL REPORT | MAY 31, 2014 NRECA-DOE SMART GRID DEMONSTRATION PROJECT | DE-OE0000222 Prepared by Maurice Martin Cooperative Research Network National Rural Electric Cooperative Association 4301 Wilson Boulevard Arlington, Virginia 22203-1860 and Rick A. Schmidt Power Systems Engineering 1532 W. Broadway Madison, Wisconsin 53713 for U.S. DOE/NETL Morgantown Campus 3610 Collins Ferry Road PO Box 880 Morgantown WV 26507-0880 project manager: craig miller, phd principal investigator: tom lovas The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association NRECA is the national service organization for more than 900 not-for-profit rural electric cooperatives and public power districts providing retail electric service to more than 42 million consumers in 47 states and whose retail sales account for approximately 12 percent of total electricity sales in the United States. NRECA’s members include consumer-owned local distribution systems — the vast majority — and 66 generation and transmission (G&T) cooperatives that supply wholesale power to their distribution cooperative owner-members. Distribution and G&T cooperatives share an obligation to serve their members by providing safe, reliable and affordable electric service. About CRN NRECA’s Cooperative Research Network™ (CRN) manages an extensive network of organizations and partners in order to conduct collaborative research for electric cooperatives. CRN is a catalyst for innovative and practical technology solutions for emerging industry issues by leading and facilitating collaborative research with co-ops, industry, universities, labs, and federal agencies. CRN fosters and communicates technical advances and business improvements to help electric cooperatives control costs, increase productivity, and enhance service to their consumer-members.
    [Show full text]
  • Friedrich Stadler, Leslie Topp, Chair: William Johnston
    1 Workshop VIENNA 1900: CURRENT DISCOURSES ON FIN-DE-SIECLE VIENNA International Center, University of New Orleans (UNO), October 24-25, 2016 SLIDE 1 Roundtable IV: Interdisciplinary Models Friedrich Stadler, Leslie Topp, Chair: William Johnston Friedrich Stadler (University of Vienna): “The Sciences and Humanities as Culture” SLIDE 2 INTRODUCTION Based on William Johnston’s path breaking trilogy of books on Austrian-Hungarian intellectual history I will focus mainly on the role of philosophy, the sciences and humanities from a trans- and interdisciplinary point of view. (Of course, the publications of Carl Schorske, Allan Janik/Stephen Toulmin, Edward Timms, David Luft, and Steven Beller and many others are to be mentioned as essential background knowledge). SLIDES 3-4: Constructive Unrest. Austrian Conference on Contemporary History Graz 2016 According to the new model of the “Long 20th Century” in Austrian history (from Habsburg Monarchy to the Republic) in general, and as applied to the history of the University of Vienna, specifically, I make a plea for this conception more or less also regarding Vienna 1900 / Fin-de-Siécle Vienna. This can be illustrated by a short report on a panel dealing with the “Paradigmenwechsel zum langen 20. Jahrhundert” (paradigm shift on the long 20th century) at the last “Österreichischer Zeitgeschichtetag” (ÖZT) in Graz, June 2016. SLIDE 5: “Wissenschaft als Kultur” (Frankfurt 1995) Following this perspective, I will argue for the need to cover all sciences (including humanities) under the umbrella of (Austro-Hungarian) culture, which seems to me the main deficit in the related historiography. Instead, the image of all sciences as an essential part of culture (Wissenschaft als Kultur) is leading up to transgressing disciplinary boundaries.
    [Show full text]