# kb

id: whig-history-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_history-1.md
category: reference
title: Whig history
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_history
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:10.884516+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: whig-history-20260505-0
summary:
=== Subsequent views === Butterfield's formulation has subsequently received much attention and the kind of historical writing he argued against in generalized terms is no longer academically respectable. Despite its polemical success, Butterfield's celebrated book was criticized by David Cannadine as "slight, confused, repetitive and superficial". However, of the English tradition more broadly, Cannadine wrote: It was fiercely partisan and righteously judgemental, dividing the personnel of the past into the good and the bad. And it did so on the basis of the marked preference for liberal and progressive causes, rather than conservative and reactionary ones ... Whig history was, in short, an extremely biased view of the past: eager to hand out moral judgements, and distorted by teleology, anachronism and present-mindedness. E. H. Carr in What Is History? (1961) gave Butterfield's book the backhanded compliment of being "a remarkable book in many ways" noting that "though it denounced the whig interpretation over some 130 pages, it did not... name a single whig except Fox, who was no historian, or a single historian save Acton, who was no whig". Michael Bentley analyses Butterfield's whig theory as referring to a canon of 19th-century historians in and of England (such as William


id: whig-history-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_history-2.md
category: reference
title: Whig history
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_history
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:10.884516+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: whig-history-20260505-0
summary:
Stubbs was a true believer who concealed his biases, even from himself, behind the façade of a dispassionate historian translating original documents into magisterial prose. His rhetorical gifts often obscured his combination of high church Anglicanism, whig history, and civic responsibility. In the Church of England, Stubbs saw the original model for the development and maintenance of English liberties. Stubb's history began with an imagined Anglo-Saxon past into which representative parliamentary institutions emerged and fought for control with the absolutist crown in various stages (including overreaches during the English Civil War) before uniting in "nation, church, peers and people" in the Glorious Revolution. This view of events was substantially challenged: Maitland discovered in 1893 that the early "parliaments" had "no hint of operating as a representative body but resembled instead a meeting of the King's Council, called to meet the king's purposes; it passed no 'legislation', but rather considered petitions or 'bills' as though acting as an ultimate court of justice". Albert Pollard, writing in 1920, also shot through much of Stubbs' ideas on the representative and law-making powers of early English parliaments, pulling the emergence of a semi-independent House of Commons to the 1620s. === Robert Hebert Quick ===


id: whig-history-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_history-3.md
category: reference
title: Whig history
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_history
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:10.884516+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: whig-history-20260505-0
summary:
=== In economics === Retrospectives on modern macroeconomics are generally whiggish histories. For example, the popularisation of mathematical models by Paul Samuelson's Foundations of Economic Analysis, when viewed by economists trained in a mathematical framework becomes "an important milestone on the road to the mathematization of economics" in a story told by the victorious. Yet "those who do not agree that such mathematization is a good thing could argue that the mathematical developments... represent a regression rather than a progression". The introduction of rational expectations similarly carries implicit hindsight bias: people who disagree on the reality of agents making decisions in the manner assumed (e.g. behavioral economics) "would not necessarily rejoice in [rational expectations'] present ascendancy". Burrow views Marxist history, with its "[supposed] anticipated terminus from which it derives its moral and political point", as "characteristically whig". === In philosophy === One very common example of Whig history is the work of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, to whom is often ascribed a teleological view of history with an inexorable trajectory in the direction of progress. Marxists have had varied views on Whig history. The traditional inheritance of Hegel, interpreted through Engels' articulation of historical materialism, implied that history progressed from


id: wilderness-therapy-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilderness_therapy-0.md
category: reference
title: Wilderness therapy
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilderness_therapy
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:12.086365+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: wilderness-therapy-20260505-0
summary:
Wilderness therapy, also known as outdoor behavioral healthcare, is a form of therapeutic intervention that uses outdoor activities and immersion in natural environments to promote psychological, behavioral, and social well-being. It is used in the treatment of mental health conditions, substance abuse disorders, and behavioral issues, particularly among adolescents and young adults. Wilderness therapy programs vary widely in structure and philosophy, but typically combine elements of psychotherapy, group processes, and experiential learning with activities such as hiking, camping, and survival skills. While the approach is most prominently developed in the United States, related practices have emerged in other regions, including Canada, Australia, and across Scandinavia, often influenced by local outdoor traditions and cultural perspectives. The field lacks a universally accepted definition, and programs differ in their clinical oversight, duration, and level of remoteness. Wilderness therapy has been the subject of ongoing debate regarding its effectiveness, safety, and ethical practices, with research producing mixed results and criticism focusing on regulation and reported incidents in some programs. == History == The concept of wilderness therapy dates back to the 1940s, linked to progressive German educator Kurt Hahn, who founded the United Kingdom's "Outward Bound", an outdoor educational organization. The origins of wilderness


id: x-club-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Club-0.md
category: reference
title: X Club
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Club
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:13.277875+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: x-club-20260505-0
summary:
The X Club was a dining club of nine men who supported the theories of natural selection and academic liberalism in late 19th-century England. Thomas Henry Huxley was the initiator; he called the first meeting for 3 November 1864. The club met in London once a month—except in July, August and September—from November 1864 until March 1893, and its members are believed to have wielded much influence over scientific thought. The members of the club were George Busk, Edward Frankland, Thomas Archer Hirst, Joseph Dalton Hooker, Thomas Henry Huxley, John Lubbock, Herbert Spencer, William Spottiswoode, and John Tyndall, united by a "devotion to science, pure and free, untrammelled by religious dogmas." The nine men who would compose the X Club already knew each other well. By the 1860s, friendships had turned the group into a social network, and the men often dined and went on holidays together. After Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species was published in 1859, the men began working together to aid the cause for naturalism and natural history. They backed the liberal Anglican movement that emerged in the early 1860s, and both privately and publicly supported the leaders of the movement. According to its members,


id: x-club-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Club-1.md
category: reference
title: X Club
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Club
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:13.277875+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: x-club-20260505-0
summary:
Later, in 1863, a new rift began to emerge within the scientific community over race theory. Debate was stirred up when the Anthropological Society of London, which rejected Darwinian theory, claimed that slavery was defensible based on the theory of evolution proposed by Darwin. The members of what would become the X Club sided with the Ethnological Society of London, which denounced slavery and embraced academic liberalism. The men of the X Club, especially Lubbock, Huxley, and Busk, felt that dissension and the "jealousies of theological sects" within learned societies were damaging, and they attempted to limit the contributions the Anthropological Society made to the British Association for the Advancement of Science, a society of which they were all members. Thus, by 1864, the members of the X Club were joined in a fight, both public and private, to unite the London scientific community with the objective of furthering the ideas of academic liberalism. === Dining clubs === Dining clubs, common in late-Victorian England, were characterised by informal gatherings where men with similar interests could share new ideas and information among friends. Many formal societies and institutions that existed in England during the 19th century started as informal dining clubs.


id: x-club-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Club-2.md
category: reference
title: X Club
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Club
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:13.277875+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: x-club-20260505-0
summary:
Between the time of its inception in 1864 and its termination in 1893, the X club and its members gained much prominence within the scientific community, carrying much influence over scientific thought, similar to the Scientific Lazzaroni in the United States and the Society of Arcueil in France. Between 1870 and 1878, Hooker, Spottiswoode, and Huxley held office in the Royal Society simultaneously, and between 1873 and 1885, they consecutively held the presidency of the Royal Society. Spottiswoode was treasurer of the Society between 1870 and 1878 and Huxley was elected Senior Secretary in 1872. Frankland and Hirst were also of importance to the Society, as the previous held the position of Foreign Secretary between 1895 and 1899, and the latter served on the Council three times between 1864 and 1882. Outside the Royal Society, the men of the X Club continued to gain influential positions. Five members of the Club held the presidency of the British Association for the Advancement of Science between 1868 and 1881. Hirst was elected president of the London Mathematical Society between 1872 and 1874 while Busk served as Examiner and eventually president of the Royal College of Surgeons. Frankland also served as president of


id: yale-divinity-school-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale_Divinity_School-0.md
category: reference
title: Yale Divinity School
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale_Divinity_School
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:14.460038+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: yale-divinity-school-20260505-0
summary:
Yale Divinity School (YDS) is one of the twelve graduate and professional schools of Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut. Congregationalist theological education was the motivation at the founding of Yale, and the professional school has its roots in a Theological Department established in 1822. The school had maintained its own campus, faculty, and degree program since 1869, and it has become more ecumenical beginning in the mid-19th century. Since the 1970s, it has been affiliated with the Episcopal Berkeley Divinity School and has housed the Institute of Sacred Music, which offers separate degree programs. In July 2017, a two-year process of formal affiliation was completed, with the addition of Andover Newton Seminary joining the school. Over 40 different denominations are represented at YDS. While Divinity Schools typically have higher admit-rates, Yale is an exception, with acceptance rates around 10-15%. YDS is the most selective theological school in the world, and is widely seen as one of the best. == History == Theological education was the earliest academic purpose of Yale University. When Yale College was founded in 1701, it was as a college of religious training for Congregationalist ministers in Connecticut Colony, designated in its charter as a school


id: yale-divinity-school-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale_Divinity_School-1.md
category: reference
title: Yale Divinity School
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale_Divinity_School
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:14.460038+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: yale-divinity-school-20260505-0
summary:
== Leadership == Gregory Sterling, a New Testament scholar and Church of Christ pastor, has been the dean of the divinity school since 2012, succeeding New Testament scholar Harold W. Attridge, who returned to teaching as a Sterling Professor upon completing two five-year terms as dean. The leaders of the affiliated seminaries are Andrew McGowan, Dean and President of Berkeley Divinity School, and Sarah Drummond, Founding Dean of Andover Newton Seminary at Yale Divinity School. Organist Martin Jean is director of the Institute of Sacred Music. === Deans of Yale Divinity School === == Campus == When the department was organized as a school in 1869, it was moved to a campus across from the northwest corner of the New Haven Green composed of East Divinity Hall (1869), Marquand Chapel (1871), West Divinity Hall (1871), and the Trowbridge Library (1881). The buildings, designed by Richard Morris Hunt, were demolished under the residential college plan and replaced by Calhoun College, now known as Grace Hopper College. In 1929, the trustees of the estate of lawyer John William Sterling agreed that a portion of his bequest to Yale would be used to build a new campus for the Divinity School. The Sterling


id: zygon-journal-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygon_(journal)-0.md
category: reference
title: Zygon (journal)
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygon_(journal)
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:15.651045+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: zygon-journal-20260505-0
summary:
Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science is a quarterly open access peer-reviewed academic journal covering religion and science published by the Open Library of Humanities. It was established in 1966 and the editor-in-chief is Arthur C. Petersen (University College London). Zygon is sponsored by the Institute on Religion in an Age of Science and the Center for Advanced Study in Religion and Science (CASIRAS). The name "Zygon" (mod. L., ad. ζυγόν Gr. yoke.), according to the journal founder Ralph Wendell Burhoe, is the Greek term for anything that joins two bodies, especially the yoking or harnessing of a team that must pull together effectively. The Zygon is the symbol of the journal, its aim being to reunite the "split team" of values and knowledge. According to the Journal Citation Reports, the journal had a 2024 impact factor of 0.6, ranking it 48th out of 69 journals (Q3) in the category "Social Issues". The Scimago Journal & Country Rank 2024 located this Journal in the 1st quartile (Q1) in the categories "Religious Studies" and "Cultural Studies". Zygon became an open access journal when it moved to the Open Library of Humanities in 2024. == References == == External links == Official


id: advanced-research-and-invention-agency-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Research_and_Invention_Agency-0.md
category: reference
title: Advanced Research and Invention Agency
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Research_and_Invention_Agency
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:17.442104+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: advanced-research-and-invention-agency-20260505-0
summary:
The Advanced Research and Invention Agency (ARIA) is a UK research funding agency established to support scientific research. Formally established by an Act of Parliament on 26 January 2023, ARIA is a non-departmental public body sponsored by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT). ARIA has a similar remit to that of its US forerunner, DARPA, the intention of the UK Agency is to fund "high-risk, high-reward" research, including precision neurotechnologies, programmable plants, robotics and AI. == History == The formation of ARIA was announced on 19 February 2021 and it was formally established on 26 January 2023. The Advanced Research and Invention Agency Act 2022 created the legislative framework for the agency and it was formally established as an independent research body in January 2023. Parliament established ARIA in statute and set a ten-year legal mandate. The law directs the agency to fund research that is risky, uncertain and speculative in nature. ARIA’s initial budget was confirmed to be approximately £800 million over five years. Following the June 2025 spending review, the Government has committed to providing ARIA with a minimum of £1bn over the spending review period of 2025–2029. In 2022 Dominic Cummings suggested that ARIA should


id: agence-nationale-de-la-recherche-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agence_nationale_de_la_recherche-0.md
category: reference
title: Agence nationale de la recherche
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agence_nationale_de_la_recherche
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:18.701595+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: agence-nationale-de-la-recherche-20260505-0
summary:
The Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR, fr: National Agency for Research) is a French institution tasked with funding scientific research. It was founded on 7 February 2005 as a groupement d'intérêt public, and has acquired the status of établissement public à caractère administratif on 1 August 2006. The ANR funds scientific teams, both public and private, in the form of short-term research contracts. Its budget was 350 million Euros in 2005, rose to 955M€ in 2009 but then fell to 703M€ in 2019. The ANR was supervised by Jacques Stern from 2007 until 2010 and by Eva Pebay-Peyroula since 2010. == Notes and references == == External links == Official site


id: austrian-science-fund-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_Science_Fund-0.md
category: reference
title: Austrian Science Fund
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_Science_Fund
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:19.977072+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: austrian-science-fund-20260505-0
summary:
The Austrian Science Fund (German: Fonds zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung, FWF) is the most important Austrian funding organization for basic research. The FWF supports research in science, engineering, and the humanities through a large variety of grant programmes, prizes and by funding infrastructure. The self-governed organization is based in Vienna and financed by the Austrian federal government. In September 2023 president Christof Gattringer voiced funding concerns: a three-year budget consensus previously reached with the Ministry of Education is lacking confirmation by the Ministry of Finance despite continuing high inflation in Austria. == Organisation == The Austrian Science Fund was established in 1967 and had a budget of 91 million euros in 2001. Most projects are individual research grants for up to three years. In addition, it also supports national research clusters, doctoral schools, scholarships for young researchers and awards like the START- and Wittgenstein-Preis. Pascale Ehrenfreund was elected president of the FWF on 6 June 2013. In recent years, the Austrian Science Fund provides growing support for the publication of articles and monographs in the open access format. == Membership == The Austrian Science Fund is a member of the European Science Foundation. == See also == Open access


id: canadian-institutes-of-health-research-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Institutes_of_Health_Research-0.md
category: reference
title: Canadian Institutes of Health Research
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Institutes_of_Health_Research
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:21.286924+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: canadian-institutes-of-health-research-20260505-0
summary:
The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR; French: Instituts de recherche en santé du Canada; IRSC) is a federal agency responsible for funding health and medical research in Canada. Comprising 13 institutes, it was formed on June 7, 2000 and is the successor to the Medical Research Council of Canada. CIHR supports more than 15,000 researchers and trainees through grants, fellowships, scholarships, and other funding, as part of the federal government's investment in health research. Paul C. Hébert is the current President. CIHR's budget for 2023-2024 was CA$1.3 billion and the number of employees (FTE) was 327. Along with the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), the CIHR forms the major source of federal government funding to post-secondary research. They are collectively referred to as the "Tri-Council" or "Tri-Agency". == History == The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) is the major federal agency responsible for funding health research in Canada. It was established by an Act of Parliament in April 2000 to create new knowledge according to internationally accepted scientific standards and translate this into improved health for Canadians, more effective health services and products, and a stronger Canadian


id: czech-science-foundation-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_Science_Foundation-0.md
category: reference
title: Czech Science Foundation
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_Science_Foundation
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:23.641166+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: czech-science-foundation-20260505-0
summary:
The Czech Science Foundation (GACR) was established in 1993 as an independent public organisation supporting basic research in the Czech Republic. On the basis of calls for proposals and a public competition, the Czech Science Foundation provides financial support for both experienced and young and early-stage researchers. It also funds international projects on a bilateral basis in cooperation with several partner agencies as well as projects carried out within international research programmes. It is one of two major government-supported research funding agencies in the Czech Republic, the other being the Technology Agency of the Czech Republic (TAČR). == GACR goals == To provide financial support for projects in basic research with a high potential for achieving world-class results. To promote and enhance international scientific cooperation in basic research. To help create attractive conditions for the professional development of young and early-stage researchers. To ensure that entrusted funds are used as effectively as possible to the benefit of the Czech and international scientific community. To create, within existing laws, the best possible conditions for the administration of project proposals and awarded projects. == GACR structure == The GACR authorities are the President, Presidium, Scientific Advisory Board and Supervisory Board. The Presidium


id: dutch-research-council-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Research_Council-0.md
category: reference
title: Dutch Research Council
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Research_Council
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:24.826276+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: dutch-research-council-20260505-0
summary:
The Dutch Research Council (NWO, Dutch: Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek) is the national research council of the Netherlands. NWO funds thousands of top researchers at universities and institutes and steers the course of Dutch science by means of subsidies and research programmes. NWO promotes quality and innovation in science. NWO is an independent administrative body under the auspices of the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. NWO directs its approximate budget of 1 billion euros towards Dutch universities and institutes, often on a project basis. Also, NWO has its own research institutes and facilitates international cooperation. The president of NWO since April 2021 is Marcel Levi. Former NWO presidents include Stan Gielen, Peter Nijkamp and Jos Engelen. NWO is also known for the annual Spinoza and Stevin Prizes. == History == The council was established in 1950 as Nederlandse Organisatie voor Zuiver-Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (ZWO). This organisation did not focus on applied research; the research organization TNO was established for that purpose. In 1988 ZWO was renamed as NWO and was given the broader mission. Like its predecessor, NWO is a public institution; its tasks and responsibilities are established in the NWO Act. On 1 January 2018 the former


id: foundation-for-science-and-technology-portugal-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_for_Science_and_Technology_(Portugal)-0.md
category: reference
title: Foundation for Science and Technology (Portugal)
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_for_Science_and_Technology_(Portugal)
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:26.121990+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: foundation-for-science-and-technology-portugal-20260505-0
summary:
The Foundation for Science and Technology (Portuguese: Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia; FCT) is an organization within the Ministry of Science, Technology and Higher Education in Portugal which evaluates and funds scientific research activities, in particular in the areas of natural sciences, exact sciences, social sciences and humanities. FCT was founded in 1997, succeeding the Junta Nacional de Investigação Científica e Tecnológica. == Vision == To establish Portugal as a global reference in science, technology and innovation Ensure that knowledge generated by scientific research is used fully, for economic growth and the well-being of all citizens == Research units funded by FCT == Most scientific research in Portugal takes place in R&D institutions financed and evaluated by FCT. As of 2019 there are 26 Associate Laboratories and 307 R&D Units, where 22,000 researchers work. These institutions are regularly evaluated by FCT. == Publications == The foundation, together with the University of Lisbon's Centre of Philosophy, publishes a biannual peer-reviewed open-access academic journal, Philosophica, International Journal for the History of Philosophy, which covers all areas of the history of philosophy. Beginning 2022 it is published on their behalf by the Philosophy Documentation Center. == References == == External links


id: german-research-foundation-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Research_Foundation-0.md
category: reference
title: German Research Foundation
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Research_Foundation
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:27.334739+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: german-research-foundation-20260505-0
summary:
The German Research Foundation (German: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [ˈdɔʏtʃə ˈfɔʁʃʊŋsɡəˌmaɪnʃaft]; abbr. DFG [ˌdeːʔɛfˈɡeː]) is a German research funding organization, which functions as a self-governing institution for the promotion of science and research in the Federal Republic of Germany. In 2019, the DFG had a funding budget of €3.3 billion. == Function == The DFG supports research in science, engineering, and the humanities through a variety of grant programmes, research prizes, and by funding infrastructure. The self-governed organization is based in Bonn and financed by the German states and the federal government of Germany. As of 2017 the organization consists of approximately 100 research universities and other research institutions. The DFG endows various research prizes, including the Leibniz Prize. The Polish-German science award Copernicus is offered jointly with the Foundation for Polish Science. According to a 2017 article in The Guardian, the DFG has announced it will publish its research in online open-access journals. == Background == In 1937, the Notgemeinschaft der Deutschen Wissenschaft (NG) ("Emergency Association of German Science") was renamed the Deutsche Gemeinschaft zur Erhaltung und Förderung der Forschung ("German Foundation for the Preservation and Promotion of Research"), for short known as the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG). Even before the election


id: health-research-board-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Research_Board-0.md
category: reference
title: Health Research Board
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Research_Board
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:28.581343+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: health-research-board-20260505-0
summary:
The Health Research Board (HRB) is a government agency responsible for funding, co-ordination, and oversight of medical research in Ireland. == History == In 1986, the Government of Ireland amalgamated the Medical Research Council of Ireland and the Medico-Social Research Board to establish the HRB under the Health (Corporate Bodies) Act 1961 and statutory instrument 279 of 1986. The HRB's original headquarters was at 73 Lower Baggot Street, Dublin 2. In July 2014, the board relocated to Grattan House, 67-72 Lower Mount Street, Dublin 2. == Chairs of the HRB == Dr WA Watts 1987 - 1989 Professor MX FitzGerald 1990 - 1997 Professor MB Murphy 1997 - 2002 Professor Hugh R. Brady 2002 - 2003 Professor D Fitzgerald 2003 - 2007 Mr Reg Shaw 2007 - 2012 Dr Declan Bedford 2012 - 2017 Professor Jane Grimson 2020 - == Chief Executives of the HRB == Lt Comdr EJ Furness and Mr J O'Gorman 1987 - 1988 (jointly, in caretaker roles) Dr JV O'Gorman 1988 - 1998 Dr R Barrington 1998 - 2007 Dr Hamish Sinclair 2007 - 2008 (acting) Mr Enda Connolly 2008 - 2014 Dr Graham Love 2014 - 2017 Dr Darrin Morrissey 2018 - 2020 Dr Mairéad


id: icelandic-centre-for-research-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_Centre_for_Research-0.md
category: reference
title: Icelandic Centre for Research
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_Centre_for_Research
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:29.863510+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: icelandic-centre-for-research-20260505-0
summary:
The Icelandic Centre for Research (RANNÍS; Icelandic: Rannsóknamiðstöð Íslands) funds and promotes scientific research in Iceland. It formed in 2003 through an act of legislation. As of April 1 2022, the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Innovation oversees its activities. It operates from headquarters in Borgartún 30 in Reykjavík. RANNÍS cooperates closely with the Icelandic Science and Technology Policy Council and provides professional assistance in the preparation and implementation of the national science and technology policy. RANNÍS administers competitive funds in the fields of research, innovation, education and culture, as well as strategic research programmes. RANNÍS coordinates and promotes Icelandic participation in European programmes such, as Horizon Europe in the fields of research and innovation, Erasmus+ in the fields of education, training, youth and sport, and Creative Europe in the fields of culture and audiovisual media. In addition, RANNÍS monitors resources and performance in R&D and promotes public awareness of research and innovation, education and culture in Iceland. == History == From 1994 to 2003, RANNÍS operated as the Icelandic Research Council. "As of 2013 scientific publications based on projects, funded entirely or partially by the Icelandic Centre for Research, Rannís, must be published in open access." == Funds


id: national-institute-for-health-and-care-research-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_for_Health_and_Care_Research-0.md
category: reference
title: National Institute for Health and Care Research
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_for_Health_and_Care_Research
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:31.167972+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: national-institute-for-health-and-care-research-20260505-0
summary:
The National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) is the British government's major funder of clinical, public health, social care and translational research. With a budget of over £1.2 billion in 2020–21, its mission is to "improve the health and wealth of the nation through research". The NIHR was established in 2006 under the government's Best Research for Best Health strategy, and is funded by the Department of Health and Social Care. As a research funder and research partner of the NHS, public health and social care, the NIHR complements the work of the Medical Research Council. NIHR focuses on translational research (translating discoveries from the laboratory to the clinic), clinical research and applied health and social care research. == History == The NIHR (originally named National Institute for Health Research) was created in April 2006 under the government's health research strategy, Best Research for Best Health. This strategy outlined the direction that NIHR research and development should take. Its predecessor was the NHS Research & Development programme which was established in 1991. Factors influencing the creation of the NIHR were the growing importance of evidence-based medicine in science and policymaking, the spread of New Public Management thinking and


id: national-institute-for-health-and-care-research-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_for_Health_and_Care_Research-1.md
category: reference
title: National Institute for Health and Care Research
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_for_Health_and_Care_Research
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:31.167972+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: national-institute-for-health-and-care-research-20260505-0
summary:
=== Public partnerships === The NIHR offers several ways for patients and the public to participate in health and care research. People can take part in a study as a research participant, for example in a clinical trial that looks for new treatments for a health condition. People who are not affected by a particular condition or who care for someone with a long-term health issue can also take part in research. The NIHR runs the online services Be Part of Research and Join Dementia Research to inform the public about what health and care research is and to help them find studies that are looking for participants. Patients and the public can also contribute to research through patient and public involvement (PPI). PPI is a partnership between members of the public (including patients, service users, carers) and researchers where public representatives can influence what should be a priority for research and help shape how the research is carried out, applied and communicated. Members of the public can find involvement opportunities in NIHR's research through the database People in Research. The website Learning for Involvement also offers information and resources for learning about public involvement and best practice case studies.


id: national-institute-for-health-and-care-research-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_for_Health_and_Care_Research-2.md
category: reference
title: National Institute for Health and Care Research
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_for_Health_and_Care_Research
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:31.167972+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: national-institute-for-health-and-care-research-20260505-0
summary:
== Publications == The NIHR publishes five peer-reviewed, open access journals which make up the NIHR Journals Library. The journals are titled Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation, Health and Social Care Delivery Research, Health Technology Assessment, Public Health Research, and Programme Grants for Applied Research. Researchers working in relevant, NIHR-funded projects are required to publish in an NIHR journal. Besides publishing the final research articles, the NIHR Journals Library supports the model of open science by providing a transparent, 'living' document for each research project which is updated alongside the progress of the study. This involves publishing all relevant materials from the outset of the studies, including the relevant systematic reviews, research protocol, study documentation, plain English descriptions, and data. The NIHR publishes short, easy-to-read summaries and thematic overviews of the most important research findings on the NIHR Evidence website. Some of the summaries are also published in The British Medical Journal. The NIHR also has an open science platform where researchers can share any kind of relevant articles, documents and data including negative or null results. === Open access === NIHR has an open access policy and was one of the original funders of Europe PubMed Central. Their updated policy


id: national-institutes-of-health-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health-0.md
category: reference
title: National Institutes of Health
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:32.428522+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: national-institutes-of-health-20260505-0
summary:
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the primary agency of the United States federal government responsible for biomedical and public health research. It was founded in 1887 and is part of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Many NIH facilities are located in Bethesda, Maryland, and other nearby suburbs of the Washington metropolitan area, with other primary facilities in Research Triangle Park in North Carolina and smaller satellite facilities located around the United States. The NIH conducts its scientific research through the NIH Intramural Research Program (IRP) and provides significant biomedical research funding to non-NIH research facilities through its Extramural Research Program. As of 2013, the IRP had 1,200 principal investigators and more than 4,000 postdoctoral fellows in basic, translational, and clinical research, being the largest biomedical research institution in the world, while, as of 2003, the extramural arm provided 28% of biomedical research funding spent annually in the U.S., or about US$26.4 billion. Basic research by the NIH contributed to every new drug approved by the Federal Drug Administration over the period 2010–2016. In early 2025, the Trump administration froze key NIH operations, and by January 2026 about 2,600 grants totaling $1.4 billion remained


id: national-institutes-of-health-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health-1.md
category: reference
title: National Institutes of Health
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:32.428522+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: national-institutes-of-health-20260505-0
summary:
The NIH Office of the Director is the central office responsible for setting policy for the NIH, and for planning, managing, and coordinating the programs and activities of all NIH components. The NIH Director plays an active role in shaping the agency's activities and outlook. The Director is responsible for providing leadership to the Institutes and Centers by identifying needs and opportunities, especially in efforts involving multiple Institutes. Within the Director's Office is the Division of Program Coordination, Planning and Strategic Initiatives with 12 divisions including: Office of AIDS Research Office of Research on Women's Health Office of Disease Prevention Sexual and Gender Minority Research Office Tribal Health Research Office Office of Program Evaluation and Performance The Agency Intramural Research Integrity Officer "is directly responsible for overseeing the resolution of all research misconduct allegations involving intramural research, and for promoting research integrity within the NIH Office of Intramural Research (OIR)." There is a Division of Extramural Activities, which has its own Director. The Office of Ethics has its own Director, as does the Office of Global Research. == Locations and campuses == Intramural research is primarily conducted at the main campus in Bethesda, Maryland, and Rockville, Maryland, and the surrounding


id: national-institutes-of-health-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health-2.md
category: reference
title: National Institutes of Health
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:32.428522+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: national-institutes-of-health-20260505-0
summary:
1908: George W. McCoy's discovery that rodents were a reservoir of bubonic plague. 1911: George W. McCoy, Charles W. Chapin, William B. Wherry, and B. H. Lamb described the previously unknown tularemia. 1924: Roscoe R. Spencer and Ralph R. Parker developed a vaccine against Rocky Mountain spotted fever. 1930: Sanford M. Rosenthal developed a treatment for mercury poisoning used widely before the development of dimercaptoethanol. 1943: Wilton R. Earle pioneered the cell culture process and published a paper describing the production of malignancy in vitro, Katherine K. Sanford developed the first clone from an isolated cancer cell, and Virginia J. Evans devised a medium that supported growth of cells in vitro. 1940s–1950s: Bernard Horecker and colleagues described the pentose phosphate pathway. 1950s: Julius Axelrod discovered a new class of enzymes, cytochrome P450 monooxygenases, a fundamental of drug metabolism. 1950: Earl Stadtman discovered phosphotransacetylose, elucidating the role of acetyl CoA in fatty acid metabolism. 1960s: Discovered the first human slow virus disease, kuru, which is a degenerative, fatal infection of the central nervous system. This discovery of a new mechanism for infectious diseases revolutionized thinking in microbiology and neurology. 1960s: Defined the mechanisms that regulate noradrenaline, one of the most important


id: national-institutes-of-health-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health-3.md
category: reference
title: National Institutes of Health
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:32.428522+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: national-institutes-of-health-20260505-0
summary:
To allocate funds, the NIH must first obtain its budget from Congress. This process begins with institute and center (IC) leaders collaborating with scientists to determine the most important and promising research areas within their fields. IC leaders discuss research areas with NIH management who then develops a budget request for continuing projects, new research proposals, and new initiatives from the Director. The NIH submits its budget request to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the HHS considers this request as a portion of its budget. Many adjustments and appeals occur between the NIH and HHS before the agency submits NIH's budget request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OMB determines what amounts and research areas are approved for incorporation into the President's final budget. The President then sends the NIH's budget request to Congress in February for the next fiscal year's allocations. The House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees deliberate and by fall, Congress usually appropriates funding. This process takes approximately 18 months before the NIH can allocate any actual funds. When a government shutdown occurs, the NIH continues to treat people who are already enrolled in clinical trials, but does not start any new


id: national-institutes-of-health-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health-4.md
category: reference
title: National Institutes of Health
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:32.428522+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: national-institutes-of-health-20260505-0
summary:
=== Funding criteria === The NIH employs five broad decision criteria in its funding policy. First, ensure the highest quality of scientific research by employing an arduous peer review process. Second, seize opportunities that have the greatest potential to yield new knowledge and that will lead to better prevention and treatment of disease. Third, maintain a diverse research portfolio to capitalize on major discoveries in a variety of fields such as cell biology, genetics, physics, engineering, and computer science. Fourth, address public health needs according to the disease burden (e.g., prevalence and mortality). And fifth, construct and support the scientific infrastructure (e.g., well-equipped laboratories and safe research facilities) necessary to conduct research. Advisory committee members advise the institute on policy and procedures affecting the external research programs and provide a second level of review for all grant and cooperative agreement applications considered by the Institute for funding. ==== Gender and sex bias ==== In 2014, it was announced that the NIH is directing scientists to perform their experiments with both female and male animals, or cells derived from females as well as males if they are studying cell cultures, and that the NIH would take the balance of each study


id: national-science-centre-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Science_Centre-0.md
category: reference
title: National Science Centre
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Science_Centre
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:44.070529+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: national-science-centre-20260505-0
summary:
The National Science Centre (Polish: Narodowe Centrum Nauki, often abbreviated NCN) is a governmental grant-making agency responsible for providing financial support for the conduct of basic science research in Poland and various programs to assist scientists throughout their careers. The NCN was founded in 2010, three years after the foundation of National Centre for Research and Development. Similar to National Science Foundation in the United States, NCN is the largest grant-making agency in Poland for fundamental research and basic science and collaborates with corresponding agencies worldwide. == Works == The central tasks of NCN include: financing: basic research carried out in the form of research projects, doctoral scholarships and post-doctoral fellowships, research projects for experienced scientists aiming at implementation of pioneering scientific research; international cooperation in the financing of basic research activities; dissemination of information about contests announced by the National Science Center; supervision over the implementation of the above-mentioned scientific research; inspiring and monitoring the financing of basic research with resources coming from outside the state budget; other tasks commissioned by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, including the development of research programs important for national culture. == Major Grants and Fellowships == The National Science Center finances


id: national-scientific-and-technical-research-council-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Scientific_and_Technical_Research_Council-0.md
category: reference
title: National Scientific and Technical Research Council
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Scientific_and_Technical_Research_Council
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:45.267832+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: national-scientific-and-technical-research-council-20260505-0
summary:
The National Scientific and Technical Research Council (Spanish: Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, CONICET) is an Argentine government agency which directs and co-ordinates most of the scientific and technical research done in universities and institutes. == History == The National Scientific and Technical Research Council was established on 5 February 1958 by a decree of the national government. Its first director was Nobel Laureate Bernardo A. Houssay. Governed by a board independent from the federal government, it funds scientific research in three basic ways. Firstly, it gives grants for collective work to research teams of well-recognized scientists of every discipline, including social sciences and the humanities. Secondly, it has a payroll of about 6,500 researchers and 2,500 technicians working as employees in different categories, from investigador asistente (assistant researcher) to investigador principal (main researcher). Thirdly, it grants scholarships for doctoral and post-doctoral studies to 8,500 young researchers from Argentina and other countries. == Ranking == In 2025, CONICET was ranked as the best Latin American government research institution by the Scimago Institutions Ranking and the 2nd among all research institutions in the region after the Universidade de São Paulo. CONICET holds the 125th position among the most prestigious


id: research-council-of-finland-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_Council_of_Finland-0.md
category: reference
title: Research Council of Finland
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_Council_of_Finland
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:46.451931+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: research-council-of-finland-20260505-0
summary:
The Research Council of Finland (Finnish: Suomen Akatemia, Swedish: Finlands Akademi) is a governmental funding body for scientific research in Finland. Until August 2023, its official English-language name was Academy of Finland. It is based in Helsinki. Yearly, the council administers over 260 million euros to Finnish research activities. Over 5000 researchers are working on projects supported by the council. The Academy of Finland should not be confused with The Finnish Academy of Science and Letters (Suomalainen tiedeakatemia) and the Finnish Society of Science and Letters (Finska Vetenskaps-Societeten) which are the two Finnish learned societies for scientists and scholars. For engineers, there are two language-based honorary academies, the Finnish Academy of Technology (Teknillisten Tieteiden Akatemia) and the Swedish Academy of Engineering Sciences in Finland (Svenska tekniska veteskapsakademien i Finland). The Finnish title of Academician (akateemikko / akademiker) is an award given by the President of Finland upon the recommendation of the Research Council to the most distinguished Finnish scientists, scholars and artists. It may also be bestowed on foreign scientists, scholars or artists who have contributed very significantly to Finnish intellectual life. At any time, there may be a maximum of 12 living scientific and scholarly academicians and eight living


id: research-council-of-norway-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_Council_of_Norway-0.md
category: reference
title: Research Council of Norway
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_Council_of_Norway
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:47.693488+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: research-council-of-norway-20260505-0
summary:
The Research Council (also the Research Council of Norway; Norwegian: Norges forskningsråd) is a Norwegian government agency that funds research and innovation projects. On behalf of the Government, the Research Council invests NOK 11.7 billion (2022) annually. The Research Council is responsible for promoting basic and applied research and innovation. This is done by managing research funding and by advising the authorities on research policy, among other things through proposals for the research budget in the National Budget. The Research Council works to promote international research and innovation cooperation, and has a number of schemes to mobilise Norwegian applicants for the EU Research and Innovation Programme. Other tasks include creating meeting places for researchers, trade and industry, public administration, public actors and other users of research. The Research Council was established in 1993 through the merging of five different previously created research councils. The Research Council has approximately 360 employees (2023). It has local representatives in nine different regions of Norway. Since 23 June 2014, the Research Council's main office is located just outside of Oslo. == Background == There were five predecessors of the council, each established as independent councils related to their own areas of interest: science and


id: research-foundation-flanders-fwo-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_Foundation_–_Flanders_(FWO)-0.md
category: reference
title: Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO)
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_Foundation_–_Flanders_(FWO)
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:48.885419+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: research-foundation-flanders-fwo-20260505-0
summary:
The Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO; Dutch: Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek – Vlaanderen) is a Belgian public research council, based in Brussels. The Flemish research council aims to sponsor ground-breaking research and innovation. Much of this work involves supporting researchers and undertakings in association with the universities and institutes of Flanders, including Ghent University, University of Leuven, University of Antwerp and Free University of Brussels, among others. == History == The FWO is a successor to the Belgian National Fund for Scientific Research (NFWO / FNRS), which had been founded in 1928, after the call from King Albert I of Belgium for the promotion of research and innovation. In 2006, the National Fund for Scientific Research (NFWO / FNRS) divided into two organisations: the FWO, for the Flemish community, and the F.R.S.-FNRS (French: Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique – FNRS) for the French-speaking region. A self-governing organization, the Research Foundation – Flanders is located in Brussels and financed by the Flemish government, the federal government, and the national lottery, with further support coming from partner institutes and companies. == Function == The FWO supports research in science, engineering, and the humanities through a variety of frameworks. It offers competitive funding


id: bank-of-sweden-tercentenary-foundation-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_Sweden_Tercentenary_Foundation-0.md
category: reference
title: Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_Sweden_Tercentenary_Foundation
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:50.110061+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: bank-of-sweden-tercentenary-foundation-20260505-0
summary:
The Riksbankens Jubileumsfond Foundation is an independent foundation with the aim of promoting high scientific quality, encouraging cross-disciplinary research, and contributing to capacity building in Swedish research within the humanities and social sciences. The foundation supports research in the humanities and social sciences with a connection to Sweden. It was established in 1962 through a donation from the Central bank of Sweden, which wished to commemorate the bank’s 300th anniversary in 1968 while also supporting “a significant national cause.” == History == Sweden has the world’s oldest central bank, and in preparation for its 300th anniversary in 1968, the bank wanted to support a significant national cause linked to science and research. As a result, the Riksbank made two donations: one to establish a prize in economic sciences in memory of Alfred Nobel, and another to support future research. On December 2, 1964, the Swedish Parliament decided to establish a foundation for this donation – the Riksbankens Jubileumsfond. In 1988, the foundation received new statutes, which made it an independent financial entity and clarified its mission. === Statutes === On January 1, 1988, Riksbankens Jubileumsfond received new statutes, which made the foundation an independent financial entity and clarified its purpose.


id: russian-foundation-for-basic-research-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Foundation_for_Basic_Research-0.md
category: reference
title: Russian Foundation for Basic Research
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Foundation_for_Basic_Research
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:51.388785+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: russian-foundation-for-basic-research-20260505-0
summary:
Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR) is a national science funding body of the Russian government created on 27 April 1992 by a decree of the President of Russia. == Activities == The Russian Foundation for Basic Research financially sponsors conferences and research, provides collective bargaining in negotiating access to research databases for Russian research institutions, and co-hosts the Scopus Awards with Elsevier for Russian scientists who score high in Elsevier's academic productivity and citation metrics and are strongly involved in RFBR's programs and grants. RFBR research grants are usually only available to Russian researchers and their international collaborators. == International collaboration == RFBR collaborates with other research foundations around the world, including CRDF Global, the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health in the United States, the French National Center for Scientific Research, the German Research Foundation the Royal Society of the United Kingdom, the Iran National Science Foundation, the Indian Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment of the Republic of Cuba, the Academy of Finland, the Research Council of Norway, and the King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology in Saudi Arabia. === International joint projects === BRICS STI Framework Programme


id: science-foundation-ireland-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Foundation_Ireland-0.md
category: reference
title: Science Foundation Ireland
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Foundation_Ireland
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:52.566462+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-foundation-ireland-20260505-0
summary:
Science Foundation Ireland (SFI; Irish: Fondúireacht Eolaíochta Éireann) was a statutory body in Ireland. It was an agency of the Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, with responsibility for funding oriented basic and applied research in the areas of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) with a strategic focus. The board of SFI was appointed by the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science. == History == The agency was established in 2003 under the Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) Act 2003. Following a Technology Foresight activity managed by Forfás, the Irish Government allocated €1.3bn under the 2000–2006 National Development Plan to spend on R&D. SFI was responsible for disbursing €650M of these monies in the targeted strategic areas of ICT and Biotechnology during this period. After an initial call for research proposals in 2000, the first Director General, Dr William Harris, joined SFI in 2001 leading the organization to the establishment of a range of research programmes from Principal Investigator Awards to large research centers, called Centers for Science & Engineering Technology. In 2006, under the next National Development Plan, under the Strategy for Science, Technology & Innovation (SSTI), the Irish Government


id: science-foundation-ireland-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Foundation_Ireland-1.md
category: reference
title: Science Foundation Ireland
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Foundation_Ireland
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:52.566462+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-foundation-ireland-20260505-0
summary:
=== Industry Programmes === The Industry Fellowship programme funds the bi-directional movement of academic and industry researchers. Fellowships can be awarded to academic researchers wishing to spend time in industry worldwide and to individuals from industry anywhere in the world (including Ireland) wishing to spend time in an eligible Irish Research Body. The programme facilitates knowledge transfer and training, building critical mass in areas of strategic importance for Ireland. SFI Research Centres are large scale Research Centres which have an economic impact for Ireland. SFI Research Centres may be funded at a level of between €1-5 million per year in direct costs. SFI funds up to 70% of the overall Research Centre budget. A minimum of 30% of the budget must be secured from industry partners, at least one-third of which must be in cash.See details on the 16 funded SFI Research Centres here: SFI Research Centre Spokes is a mechanism to allow new industry and academic partners to join the existing SFI Research Centres. SFI Partnership Programme is a mechanism by which SFI builds collaborations with industry, funding agencies, charities, philanthropic organisations or higher education institutes (HEIs) in order to co-fund future opportunities. SFI Centre for Research Training is


id: science-fund-of-the-republic-of-serbia-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Fund_of_the_Republic_of_Serbia-0.md
category: reference
title: Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Fund_of_the_Republic_of_Serbia
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:53.873148+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-fund-of-the-republic-of-serbia-20260505-0
summary:
Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia is a public organization that provides support for science and research activities in the Republic of Serbia. It was founded with the aim of providing support and conditions for the continuous development of scientific research and development activities in the Republic of Serbia, necessary for the progress of a knowledge-based society. Activities are implemented through scientific, technological and development programs to achieve the strategic goals of the scientific and technological development of the Republic of Serbia. As part of the Fund's program, projects are financed through public calls. The projects ensure a high scientific level and innovative results, competitiveness at the international level and relevance in relation to the challenges of society. The Law on the Fund for Science of the Republic of Serbia was adopted in December 2018, and the Fund began its work in March 2019. == About Science Fund == === Establishment of the Science Fund === The Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia was established by the Government of the Republic of Serbia with the aim of establishing a mechanism for project financing of science and scientific research. This decision is in line with the commitment of the


id: science-fund-of-the-republic-of-serbia-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Fund_of_the_Republic_of_Serbia-1.md
category: reference
title: Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Fund_of_the_Republic_of_Serbia
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:53.873148+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-fund-of-the-republic-of-serbia-20260505-0
summary:
== Bodies of the Science Fund == The bodies of the Science Fund are: Director, Supervisory Board, Management Board, and Scientific Council of the Fund. The Director is appointed and dismissed by the Government on the proposal of the Board of Directors, with the prior approval of the Minister. The Director is appointed based on a public competition for a period of four years. The current acting director of the Fund is Dr. Milica Đurić-Jovičić. The Management Board has five members, one of whom is the president, who are appointed and dismissed by the Government, at the proposal of the Ministry. The members of the management board must have international experience in business covered by the Law, experience in management business and at least 15 years of work experience. The term of the members of the board of directors is four years, with the possibility of another appointment. The President of the board of directors is Dr. Vujo Drndarević. The Supervisory Board has three members, one of whom is the president, who is appointed and dismissed by the Government, on the proposal of the ministry responsible for scientific research activity, of which at least two members are from the economic


id: science-fund-of-the-republic-of-serbia-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Fund_of_the_Republic_of_Serbia-2.md
category: reference
title: Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Fund_of_the_Republic_of_Serbia
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:53.873148+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-fund-of-the-republic-of-serbia-20260505-0
summary:
== Programs of the Science Fund == Program for Excellent Projects of Young Researchers (PROMIS) The Program for Excellent Projects of Young Researchers (PROMIS) is a program of the Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia intended for excellent projects of young researchers in the early stages of their careers. The goals of the PROMIS program are to involve excellent young researchers in scientific research work, to strengthen their professional capacities, to train young doctors of science to manage projects, to train young researchers to apply for other research and development projects, to create new project teams, to support excellent ideas and to support scientific research work that will have a positive impact on society and the economy. As part of the first PROMIS program announced by the Science Fund, 59 basic and applied research projects were selected, which will be implemented in the period 2020–2022. Fields of science: natural sciences, engineering and technology, medicine, biotechnologies, as well as social sciences and humanities. Program budget: EUR 8.9 million Program for Development of Projects in the Field of Artificial Intelligence (PRVI) The Program for Development of Projects in the Field of Artificial Intelligence is realized within two subprograms, one intended for


id: science-fund-of-the-republic-of-serbia-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Fund_of_the_Republic_of_Serbia-3.md
category: reference
title: Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Fund_of_the_Republic_of_Serbia
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:53.873148+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-fund-of-the-republic-of-serbia-20260505-0
summary:
In accordance with the goal of involving more young researchers in scientific research projects, within the PRISMA program it was possible to register as team members doctoral students who have not yet been selected for a position, with the obligation to acquire the position before the start of the project implementation. Program budget: EUR 25,000,000 == Presentation of scientists and scientific projects == The Science Fund strives to provide high visibility to all supported projects and research activities. This is one of the ways to encourage researchers and the industry to new partnerships and to expand cooperation at the international level. The Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia achieves this goal by publishing publications on programs and projects, organizing exhibitions and events dedicated to promoting science, certain scientific fields and topics, as well as participating in various domestic and international gatherings, conferences and fairs where it presents the results and successes of research within the projects funded by the Science Fund. In addition, the Science Fund regularly works to increase the visibility of projects and their activities and results in the media, providing support for scientists to promote the projects they are implementing, in the media. == See also


id: south-african-medical-research-council-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_Medical_Research_Council-0.md
category: reference
title: South African Medical Research Council
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_Medical_Research_Council
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:55.185824+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: south-african-medical-research-council-20260505-0
summary:
The South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC) is a para-statal medical research organisation in South Africa. The current president is professor Ntobeko Ntusi. The South African Medical Research Council was established in 1969 to act as an independent statutory body to co-ordinate health and medical research activities throughout South Africa. The SAMRC strives to “advance the nation’s health and quality of life and address inequity by conducting and funding relevant and responsive health research, capacity development, innovation, and research translation”. Research conducted by the SAMRC is in the fields of tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS, cardiovascular diseases, non-communicable diseases, gender and health, alcohol abuse, and drug abuse. It is a member of the Innovative Vector Control Consortium. == References ==


id: state-research-agency-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Research_Agency-0.md
category: reference
title: State Research Agency
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Research_Agency
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:56.411791+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: state-research-agency-20260505-0
summary:
The State Research Agency (Spanish: Agencia Estatal de Investigación, AEI) is the Spanish research funding agency responsible for the promotion of scientific and technical research in all areas of knowledge through the competitive and efficient allocation of public resources, the monitoring of actions financed and their impact, and advice on action planning or initiatives through which the R&D policies of the General State Administration are implemented. The AEI was created in November 2015, although it came into operation on 20 June 2016 with the first meeting of the Governing Council. The Agency is chaired by the Secretary of State for Science, currently Juan Cruz Cigudosa, and the CEO is José Manuel Fernández Labastida. == Structure == The structure of the State Research Agency is: The President. The President of the Agency is the Secretary of State for Science of the Ministry of Science. The Governing Council. Collective-decision-making body. The Director-General. Chief executive of the AEI. The Secretary-General. Responsible for the day-to-day management of the AEF and its internal services. The Deputy Directorate for Economic Management of Aids The Directorate for Scientific and Technological Management. The Deputy Directorate for Evaluation. The Deputy Directorate for Thematic Programs. The Deputy Directorate for Horizontal


id: swedish-research-council-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Research_Council-0.md
category: reference
title: Swedish Research Council
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Research_Council
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:57.628198+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: swedish-research-council-20260505-0
summary:
The Swedish Research Council (Swedish: Vetenskapsrådet) is a Government agency in Sweden established in 2001, with the responsibility to support and develop basic scientific research. Its objective is for Sweden to be a leading nation in scientific research. The agency has three main functions: To distribute government funding for basic research To advise the government on issues related to scientific research To communicate science and scientific research to the general public == See also == Open access in Sweden == References == == External links == Swedish Research Council - Official site


id: swiss-national-science-foundation-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Science_Foundation-0.md
category: reference
title: Swiss National Science Foundation
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Science_Foundation
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:06:58.829210+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: swiss-national-science-foundation-20260505-0
summary:
The Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF, German: Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung, SNF; French: Fonds national suisse de la recherche scientifique, FNS; Italian: Fondo nazionale svizzero per la ricerca scientifica) or Swiss National Fund is a science research support organisation mandated by the Swiss Federal Government. The Swiss National Science Foundation was established under private law by physicist and medical doctor Alexander von Muralt in 1952. == Organisation == The SNSF consists of three main bodies: Foundation Council, National Research Council and Administrative Offices. The Foundation Council is the highest authority and makes strategic decisions. The National Research Council is composed of distinguished researchers who mostly work at Swiss institutions of higher education. They assess research proposals submitted to the SNSF and make funding decisions. The National Research Council comprises up to 100 members and is subdivided into four divisions: Division I: humanities and social sciences Division II: mathematics, natural sciences and engineering sciences Division III: biology and medicine Division IV: programmes (National Research Programmes and National Centres of Competence in Research) Mandated by the federal authorities, the Swiss National Science Foundation supports basic science in all academic disciplines. == Research programmes == The National Research Programmes (NRP)


id: uk-research-and-innovation-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Research_and_Innovation-0.md
category: reference
title: UK Research and Innovation
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Research_and_Innovation
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:00.037438+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: uk-research-and-innovation-20260505-0
summary:
UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) is a non-departmental public body of the Government of the United Kingdom that directs research and innovation funding, funded through the science budget of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. == History and role == UKRI was created following a report by Sir Paul Nurse, the President of the Royal Society, who recommended the merger in order to increase integrative cross-disciplinary research. UKRI was established on 1 April 2018 by the Higher Education and Research Act 2017. It brought together the seven research councils and two additional bodies, Innovate UK and Research England. Innovate UK (formerly the Technology Strategy Board) was an arm's length body of the Department of Trade and Industry, while Research England succeeded the former Higher Education Funding Council for England. Research England is responsible for the Research Excellence Framework, or REF, and is developing a new knowledge exchange framework, KEF. Working in partnership with universities, research organisations, businesses, charities, and government, its mission is to foster research and development within the United Kingdom and create a positive "impact"—"push the frontiers of human knowledge and understanding", "deliver economic impact", and "create social and cultural impact". The first Chief Executive Officer of


id: wellcome-trust-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellcome_Trust-0.md
category: reference
title: Wellcome Trust
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellcome_Trust
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:01.298684+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: wellcome-trust-20260505-0
summary:
The Wellcome Trust is a charitable foundation focused on health research based in London, United Kingdom. It was established in 1936 with legacies from the pharmaceutical magnate Henry Wellcome (founder of Burroughs Wellcome, one of the predecessors of GSK plc) to fund research to improve human and animal health. The aim of the Trust is to "support science to solve the urgent health challenges facing everyone." It had a financial endowment of £37.6 billion in 2025, making it the fourth wealthiest charitable foundation in the world. In 2012, the Wellcome Trust was described by the Financial Times as the United Kingdom's largest provider of non-governmental funding for scientific research, and one of the largest providers in the world. According to their annual report, the Wellcome Trust spent GBP £1.1 billion on charitable activities across their 2023/2024 financial year. According to the OECD, the Wellcome Trust's financing for 2019 development increased by 22% to US$327 million. == Headquarters == The Wellcome Trust's operations are run from two buildings on Euston Road in London. The Wellcome Building, at 183 Euston Road, built in 1932 in Portland stone houses the Wellcome Collection and the adjoining glass and steel building at 215 Euston Road


id: wellcome-trust-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellcome_Trust-1.md
category: reference
title: Wellcome Trust
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellcome_Trust
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:01.298684+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: wellcome-trust-20260505-0
summary:
=== Support for open access and open data === The Wellcome Trust plays an important role in encouraging publication of research in open access repositories such as Europe PubMed Central (EuropePMC). The Wellcome Trust believes that maximising the distribution of these papers – by providing free, online access – is the most effective way of ensuring that the research can be accessed, read and built upon. In turn, this will foster a richer research culture. In 2016, the Wellcome Trust partnered with the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute to launch the Open Science Prize to "help develop services, tools and platforms that enable open content to be discovered, assessed and re-used in ways that will advance discovery and spark innovation." In 2016, Wellcome Trust announced that it would be launching Wellcome Open Research, an open access publication system running on the F1000 Research platform. Article processing charges will be covered directly by Wellcome Trust. Papers from the system are now indexed in PubMed Central. === Membership in the Global Health Innovative Technology Fund (GHIT) === In the summer of 2015, the Wellcome Trust joined the Japanese government, 7 Japanese pharmaceutical and diagnostics companies,


id: academic-imperialism-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_imperialism-0.md
category: reference
title: Academic imperialism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_imperialism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:02.884586+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: academic-imperialism-20260505-0
summary:
Academic imperialism is an unequal relationship between groups or disciplines of academic study, such that one dominates others, consuming them or leaving them ignored. Early theories of academic imperialism date to the 1960s. == Definitions == Academic imperialism has been defined either in the context of certain disciplines or subdisciplines as oppressing others or (more often) as part of political imperialism that has resulted in inequality between academia in the First World (the West) and Third World. === Within disciplines === In the intradisciplinary context, an example of imperialistic behavior was the dismissive attitude of the 1920s-1930s adherents of behavioral psychology in the United States towards non-behavioral psychologists. === Internationally === In the international context, academic imperialism began in the colonial period when the colonial powers designed and implemented a system of academia in their colonial territories. C. K. Raju claims academic imperialism emerged thanks to racism among native colonial elites. Academic imperialism is blamed for "tutelage, conformity, secondary role of dominated intellectuals and scholars, rationalization of the civilizing mission, and the inferior talent of scholars from the home country specializing in studies of the colony." In the modern postcolonial era, academic imperialism has transformed itself into a more indirect


id: boundary-object-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_object-0.md
category: reference
title: Boundary object
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_object
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:04.153145+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: boundary-object-20260505-0
summary:
In sociology and science and technology studies, a boundary object is information, such as specimens, field notes, and maps, used in different ways by different communities for collaborative work through scales. Boundary objects are plastic, interpreted differently across communities but with enough immutable content (i.e., common identity across social words and contexts) to maintain integrity. The concept was introduced by Susan Leigh Star and James R. Griesemer in a 1989 publication (p. 393): Boundary objects are objects which are both plastic enough to adapt to local needs and constraints of the several parties employing them, yet robust enough to maintain a common identity across sites. They are weakly structured in common use, and become strongly structured in individual-site use. They may be abstract or concrete. They have different meanings in different social worlds but their structure is common enough to more than one world to make them recognizable, a means of translation. The creation and management of boundary objects is key in developing and maintaining coherence across intersecting social worlds. In their article, Star and Griesemer describe the importance of boundary objects and methods standardization in the development of the Berkeley Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. Boundary objects can be abstract


id: empirical-sociology-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_sociology-0.md
category: reference
title: Empirical sociology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_sociology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:06.747763+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: empirical-sociology-20260505-0
summary:
Empirical sociology is the study of sociology based on methodological methods and techniques for collecting, processing, and communicating primary sociological information. Describes the situation of the aspects of social life such as economy, law, family, and politics during the research. Empirical sociology is often concerned with aspects of everyday life with common sense, which it treats as a resource, a form of knowledge. Empirical sociology inductively studies how people appreciate and get along with each other. Empirical sociology is an American tradition with roots in the social reform movements of the Progressive Era. == Definition == The task of empirical sociology is to conduct inductive research on a particular social phenomenon. The German sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies defined empirical sociology as the collection of factual information or evidence. Sociologist Morris Janowitz defined empirical sociology as collecting and planning empirical indicators of change. Morris describes the relationship between history and empirical sociology as "At this point, sociology and "history” converge. All empirical sociology is history, but history is not all empirical sociology". == Timeline == The first stage of empirical sociology was represented by the changes introduced into the scientific procedure by the Chicago school between 1895 and 1929. The American sociologist


id: epistemic-cultures-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemic_cultures-0.md
category: reference
title: Epistemic cultures
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemic_cultures
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:08.075962+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: epistemic-cultures-20260505-0
summary:
Epistemic cultures (often used in plural form) is a concept developed in the nineties by anthropologist Karin Knorr Cetina in her book Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Opposed to a monist vision of scientific activity (according to which, would exist a unique scientific method), Knorr Cetina defines the concept of epistemic cultures as a diversity of scientific activities according to different scientific fields, not only in methods and tools, but also in types of reasonings, ways to establish evidence, and relationships between theory and empiry. Knorr Cetina's work is seminal in questioning the so-called unity of science. == Knorr Cetina's anthropology == In practice, Knorr Cetina compares two contemporary important scientific fields: High energy physics and molecular biology. She worked as an anthropologist within two laboratories, along the line of the laboratory anthropology work by Latour and Woolgar. Her anthropological work is comparative and the two chosen scientific fields are highly mediaticized and easily distinguishable. Epistemic cultures as a philosophical concept has been perused by numerous philosophical, anthropological or historical studies of science. == Two distinct publication regimes == High energy physics and molecular biology are very different as scientific fields belonging to two different epistemic cultures. They


id: harem-effect-science-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harem_effect_(science)-0.md
category: reference
title: Harem effect (science)
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harem_effect_(science)
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:10.486207+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: harem-effect-science-20260505-0
summary:
In the sociology and history of science, the harem effect refers to a phenomenon whereby a male scientist, in a position of power, predominantly hires female subordinates for his research team. Positively, the "Harem Effect" provided female scientists with exceptional possibilities to pursue careers in their preferred professions. Additionally, it made a lot of scientific endeavours attainable from an economic standpoint. These ladies were the human computers of a period before computers. The downside was that female scientists were frequently refused acknowledgement for their findings and hindered by "busy work," sometimes known as "women's labour." The women at the "harem" received compensation less compared to their male colleagues, yet put in more hours than males despite the fact that this "women's profession" usually required accurate assessments, difficult mathematical calculations, and large amounts of data processing. Most importantly, it is sometimes forgotten that these female scientists' "women's labour" during the Victorian era led to remarkable advancements in a variety of subjects. == History == While there are numerous historical examples of this phenomenon and the practice may continue today, two examples stand out in the literature. Erwin Frink Smith, a USDA plant pathologist in the Bureau of Plant Industry, hired more


id: sociology-and-the-history-of-science-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_and_the_history_of_science-0.md
category: reference
title: Sociology and the history of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_and_the_history_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:11.658331+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: sociology-and-the-history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
Throughout the 20th and 21st century, sociological inquiry has sought to analyze large-scale socialized patterns and trends in the development of science, as well as ask and answer questions about how science "works" both in a philosophical and practical sense. In particular, sociologists concerned with the history of science ask how societies construct narritives around scienticity, and how methodologies and paradigms throughout scientific history not only change, but change in context to culture, authority, political economy, and more sociologically strident means of analysis. == Science as a social enterprise == In the last few centuries, science as a social enterprise has grown rapidly. The few individuals who could conduct natural research in antiquity were either wealthy individuals themselves, had wealthy sponsors, or had the backing of a religious group. Today, scientific research has tremendous government support and also ongoing support from the private sector. Available methods of communication have improved tremendously over time. Instead of waiting months or years for a hand-copied letter to arrive, today scientific communication can be practically instantaneous. Earlier, most natural philosophers worked in relative isolation, due to the difficulty and slowness of communication. Still, there was a considerable amount of cross-fertilization between distant groups and


id: sociology-and-the-history-of-science-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_and_the_history_of_science-1.md
category: reference
title: Sociology and the history of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_and_the_history_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:11.658331+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: sociology-and-the-history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
== Political support == One of the basic requirements for a scientific community is the existence and approval of a political sponsor; in England, the Royal Society operates under the aegis of the monarchy; in the US, the National Academy of Sciences was founded by Act of the United States Congress; etc. Otherwise, when the basic elements of knowledge were being formulated, the political rulers of the respective communities could choose to arbitrarily either support or disallow the nascent scientific communities. For example, Alhazen had to feign madness to avoid execution. The polymath Shen Kuo lost political support, and could not continue his studies until he came up with discoveries that showed his worth to the political rulers. The admiral Zheng He could not continue his voyages of exploration after the emperors withdrew their support. Another famous example was the suppression of the work of Galileo, by the twentieth century, Galileo would be pardoned. == Patterns in the history of science == One of the major occupations with those interested in the history of science is whether or not it displays certain patterns or trends, usually along the question of change between one or more scientific theories. Generally speaking, there


id: sociology-and-the-history-of-science-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_and_the_history_of_science-2.md
category: reference
title: Sociology and the history of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_and_the_history_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:11.658331+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: sociology-and-the-history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
== The nature of scientific discovery == Individual ideas and accomplishments are among the most famous aspects of science, both internally and in larger society. Breakthrough figures like Sir Isaac Newton or Albert Einstein are often celebrated as geniuses and heroes of science. Popularizers of science, including the news media and scientific biographers, contribute to this phenomenon. But many scientific historians emphasize the collective aspects of scientific discovery, and de-emphasize the importance of the "Eureka!" moment. A detailed look at the history of science often reveals that the minds of great thinkers were primed with the results of previous efforts, and often arrive on the scene to find a crisis of one kind or another. For example, Einstein did not consider the physics of motion and gravitation in isolation. His major accomplishments solved a problem which had come to a head in the field only in recent years—empirical data showing that the speed of light was inexplicably constant, no matter the apparent speed of the observer. (See Michelson–Morley experiment.) Without this information, it is very unlikely that Einstein would have conceived of anything like relativity. The question of who should get credit for any given discovery is often a source


id: intersubjective-verifiability-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjective_verifiability-0.md
category: reference
title: Intersubjective verifiability
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjective_verifiability
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:12.885094+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: intersubjective-verifiability-20260505-0
summary:
Intersubjective verifiability is the capacity of a concept to be readily and accurately communicated between individuals ("intersubjectively"), and to be reproduced under varying circumstances for the purposes of verification. It is a core principle of empirical, scientific investigation. Although there are areas of belief that do not consistently employ intersubjective verifiability (e.g., many religious claims), intersubjective verifiability is a near-universal way of arbitrating truth claims used by people everywhere. In its basic form, it can be found in colloquial expressions, e.g., "I'm from Missouri. Show me!" or "Seeing is believing". The scientific principle of replication of findings by investigators other than those that first reported the phenomenon is simply a more highly structured form of the universal principle of intersubjective verifiability. == Subjective experience == Each individual is a subject, and must subjectively experience the physical world. Each subject has a different perspective and point of view on various aspects of the world. However, by sharing their comparable experiences intersubjectively, individuals may gain an increasingly similar understanding of the world. In this way, many different subjective experiences can come together to form intersubjective ones that are less likely to be prone to individual bias or gaps in knowledge. While specific


id: mathematical-sociology-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology-0.md
category: reference
title: Mathematical sociology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:15.330881+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: mathematical-sociology-20260505-0
summary:
Mathematical sociology is an interdisciplinary field of research concerned with the use of mathematics within sociological research. == History == Starting in the early 1940s, Nicolas Rashevsky, and subsequently in the late 1940s, Anatol Rapoport and others, developed a relational and probabilistic approach to the characterization of large social networks in which the nodes are persons and the links are acquaintanceship. During the late 1940s, formulas were derived that connected local parameters such as closure of contacts – if A is linked to both B and C, then there is a greater than chance probability that B and C are linked to each other – to the global network property of connectivity. Moreover, acquaintanceship is a positive tie, but what about negative ties such as animosity among persons? To tackle this problem, graph theory, which is the mathematical study of abstract representations of networks of points and lines, can be extended to include these two types of links and thereby to create models that represent both positive and negative sentiment relations, which are represented as signed graphs. A signed graph is called balanced if the product of the signs of all relations in every cycle (links in every graph cycle)


id: mathematical-sociology-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology-1.md
category: reference
title: Mathematical sociology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:15.330881+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: mathematical-sociology-20260505-0
summary:
== Further developments == In 1954, a critical expository analysis of Rashevsky's social behavior models was written by sociologist James S. Coleman. Rashevsky's models and as well as the model constructed by Simon raise a question: how can one connect such theoretical models to the data of sociology, which often take the form of surveys in which the results are expressed in the form of proportions of people believing or doing something. This suggests deriving the equations from assumptions about the chances of an individual changing state in a small interval of time, a procedure well known in the mathematics of stochastic processes. Coleman embodied this idea in his 1964 book Introduction to Mathematical Sociology, which showed how stochastic processes in social networks could be analyzed in such a way as to enable testing of the constructed model by comparison with the relevant data. The same idea can and has been applied to processes of change in social relations, an active research theme in the study of social networks, illustrated by an empirical study appearing in the journal Science. In other work, Coleman employed mathematical ideas drawn from economics, such as general equilibrium theory, to argue that general social theory


id: mathematical-sociology-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology-2.md
category: reference
title: Mathematical sociology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:15.330881+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: mathematical-sociology-20260505-0
summary:
== Research programs == Many of the developments in mathematical sociology, including formal theory, have exhibited notable decades-long advances that began with path-setting contributions by leading mathematical sociologists and formal theorists. This provides another way of taking note of recent contributions but with an emphasis on continuity with early work through the use of the idea of “research program,” which is a coherent series of theoretical and empirical studies based on some fundamental principle or approach. There are more than a few of these programs and what follows is no more than a brief capsule description of leading exemplars of this idea in which there is an emphasis on the originating leadership in each program and its further development over decades. (1) Rational Choice Theory and James S. Coleman: After his 1964 pioneering Introduction to Mathematical Sociology, Coleman continued to make contributions to social theory and mathematical model building and his 1990 volume, Foundations of Social Theory was the major theoretical work of a career that spanned the period from 1950s to 1990s and included many other research-based contributions. The Foundation book combined accessible examples of how rational choice theory could function in the analysis of such sociological topics as


id: mathematical-sociology-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology-3.md
category: reference
title: Mathematical sociology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:15.330881+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: mathematical-sociology-20260505-0
summary:
In the simplest models, each person in an interactive pair, is represented in terms of one side of a role relationship in which fundamental sentiments associated with each role guide the process of immediate interaction. A higher level of the control process can be activated in which the definition of the situation is transformed. This research program comprises several of the key chapters in a 2006 volume of contributions to control systems theory (in the sense of Powers 1975 ) in sociology. (8) "Distributive Justice Theory" and Guillermina Jasso: Since 1980, Jasso has treated problems of distributive justice with an original theory that uses mathematical methods. She has elaborated upon and applied this theory to a wide range of social phenomena. Her most general mathematical apparatus – with the theory of distributive justice as a special case—deals with any subjective comparison between some actual state and some reference level for it, e.g., a comparison of an actual reward with an expected reward. In her justice theory, she starts with a very simple premise, the justice evaluation function (the natural logarithm of the ratio of actual to just reward) and then derives numerous empirically testable implications. (9) Collaborative research and John


id: mathematical-sociology-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology-4.md
category: reference
title: Mathematical sociology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_sociology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:15.330881+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: mathematical-sociology-20260505-0
summary:
== Awards in mathematical sociology == The Mathematical Sociology section of The American Sociological Association in 2002 initiated awards for contributions to the field, including The James S. Coleman Distinguished Career Achievement Award. (Coleman had died in 1995 before the section had been established.) Given every other year, the awardees include some of those just listed in terms of their career-long research programs: 2022: Guillermina Jasso, New York University 2020: Noah Friedkin, University of California, Santa Barbara 2018: Ronald Breiger, University of Arizona 2017: Lynn Smith-Lovin, Duke University. 2014: Philip Bonacich, University of California, Los Angeles. 2012: John Skvoretz, University of South Florida. 2010: David R. Heise, Indiana University. 2008: Scott Boorman, Yale University. 2006: Linton Freeman, University of California, Irvine. 2004: Thomas Fararo, University of Pittsburgh. 2002: Harrison White, Columbia University. The section's other categories of awards and their recipients are listed at ASA Section on Mathematical Sociology == Texts and journals == Mathematical sociology textbooks cover a variety of models, usually explaining the required mathematical background before discussing important work in the literature (Fararo 1973, Leik and Meeker 1975, Bonacich and Lu 2012). An earlier text by Otomar Bartos (1967) is still of relevance. Of wider scope and


id: merton-thesis-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merton_thesis-0.md
category: reference
title: Merton thesis
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merton_thesis
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:16.583713+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: merton-thesis-20260505-0
summary:
The Merton thesis is an argument about the nature of early experimental science proposed by Robert K. Merton. Similar to Max Weber's famous claim on the link between Protestant work ethic and the capitalist economy, Merton argued for a similar positive correlation between the rise of Protestant Pietism and early experimental science. The Merton thesis has resulted in continuous debates. Although scholars are still debating it, Merton's 1936 doctoral dissertation (and two years later his first monograph by the same title) Science, Technology and Society in 17th-Century England raised important issues on the connections between religion and the rise of modern science, became a significant work in the realm of the sociology of science and continues to be cited in new scholarship. Merton further developed this thesis in other publications. == Thesis == The Merton thesis has two separate parts: firstly, it presents a theory that science changes due to an accumulation of observations and improvement in experimental technique and methodology; secondly, it puts forward the argument that the popularity of science in England in the 17th century, and the religious demography of the Royal Society (English scientists of that time were predominantly Puritans or other Protestants) can be explained


id: mihi-itch-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mihi_itch-0.md
category: reference
title: Mihi itch
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mihi_itch
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:17.944152+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: mihi-itch-20260505-0
summary:
Mihi itch or Mihisucht is the ambition to describe new species (or other taxa: subspecies, hybrids, genera, etc.) as a means to immortalize one's name. Mihi is the dative form of the Latin word ego, thus "mihi itch" means to satisfy one's egotistical impulses. The expression appeared in print as early as 1884. A consequence of the Mihi itch may be the unwarranted description of new taxa, differing only slightly from already established taxa, leading to taxonomic inflation. A more extreme case may be termed taxonomic vandalism when a large number of species are described with limited scientific evidence. == Examples == La "nouvelle école" in malacology, led by Jules René Bourguignat, was responsible for the description of hundreds of new species of molluscs in Europe at the end of the nineteen century. Harold St. John published 440 names in the genus Pandanus, which encompasses c. 600 accepted species, and 283 names in the genus Cyrtandra, which encompasses c. 700 accepted species. Between 2000 and 2011, Raymond Hoser published 582 species names, and 340 generic names of animals (mostly reptiles). == See also == Taxonomic vandalism Taxonomic inflation == References ==


id: no-innovation-without-representation-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_innovation_without_representation-0.md
category: reference
title: No innovation without representation
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_innovation_without_representation
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:19.284555+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: no-innovation-without-representation-20260505-0
summary:
No innovation without representation is a democratic ideal of ensuring that everyone involved gets a chance to be represented fairly in technological developments. Political philosopher of technology Langdon Winner states that groups and social interests likely to be affected by a particular kind of technological change ought to be represented at an early stage in defining exactly what that technology will be. It is the idea that relevant parties have a say in technological developments and are not left in the dark. It has been spoken about by political scientist Massimiano Bucchi. This ideal does not require the public to become experts on the topics of science and engineering, it only asks that the opinions and ideas be heard before making drastic decisions, as talked about by Steven L. Goldman. == Arguments for no innovation without representation == Arguments for no innovation without representation stated by Carl Mitcham: Experts cannot escape public influence. There will always be influence from corporations or outside sources. "Technoscientific decision making is never neutral or objective." Public participation will have a more beneficial long-term effect than no participation. "Without public participation nothing will get done" Experts promote their own self-interest at the expense of the


id: helga-nowotny-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helga_Nowotny-0.md
category: reference
title: Helga Nowotny
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helga_Nowotny
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:20.479182+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: helga-nowotny-20260505-0
summary:
Helga Nowotny (born 9 August 1937) is professor emeritus of Social Studies of Science, ETH Zurich. She has held numerous leadership roles on Academic boards and public policy councils, and she has authored many publications in the social studies of science and technology. == Early life == Nowotny grew up in Vienna, Austria during World War II. In interviews, she has recalled first wanting to become a scientist at the age of 8, when she was sent to Vorarlberg, the westernmost province of Austria, and quickly learned the local dialect. Nowotny received her doctorate of jurisprudence at the University of Vienna in 1959. After completing her degree, she faced opposition to her application for an assistant professorship in the Department of Criminology there on the basis of her being a woman. She agreed with the hiring professor that if a more capable man applied for the position, he could have the job. In the end, she was hired to the position. It was there that she became interested in the sociology of science. In 1965, she moved to New York City with her husband, where she enrolled in a sociology doctoral program. There, she met Paul Lazarsfeld and Robert K.


id: helga-nowotny-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helga_Nowotny-1.md
category: reference
title: Helga Nowotny
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helga_Nowotny
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:20.479182+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: helga-nowotny-20260505-0
summary:
== Awards and prizes == Nowotny is a Member of Academia Europaea and Foreign Member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences since 2006. Among other honours she has been awarded the J.D. Bernal Prize for her lifelong achievements in social studies of science. In October 2015, she received an honorary doctorate at the University of Bergen. She has also received an honorary doctorate from the Weizmann Institute of Science and the University of Twente. In July 2013, Nowotny was awarded an Honorary Doctorate by Lancaster University, UK. In September 2017, she was awarded the President's Medal of the British Academy "for her contribution to the founding and shaping of the European Research Council, and positively influencing the shape of research funding and research policy in the UK and Europe". == Selected bibliography == === Books === Nowotny, Helga; Mendelsohn, Everett (1984). Nineteen eighty-four: science between utopia and dystopia. Dordrecht Boston Hingham, Massachusetts: D. Reidel Publishg Co. ISBN 9789027717214. Nowotny, Helga; et al. (1994). The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications. ISBN 9780803977945. Nowotny, Helga; Taschwer, Klaus (1996). The sociology of the sciences. Cheltenham, UK Brookfield, Vermont,


id: obliteration-by-incorporation-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obliteration_by_incorporation-0.md
category: reference
title: Obliteration by incorporation
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obliteration_by_incorporation
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:21.700270+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: obliteration-by-incorporation-20260505-0
summary:
In sociology of science, obliteration by incorporation (OBI) occurs when at some stage in the development of a science, certain ideas become so universally accepted and commonly used that their contributors are no longer cited. Eventually, its source and creator are forgotten ("obliterated") as the concept enters common knowledge (is "incorporated"). Obliteration occurs when "the sources of an idea, finding or concept, become obliterated by incorporation in canonical knowledge, so that only a few are still aware of their parentage". == Concept == The concept was introduced by Robert K. Merton in 1949, although some incorrectly attribute it to Eugene Garfield, whose work contributed to the popularization of Merton's theory. Merton introduced the concept of "obliteration by incorporation" in the 1968 enlarged edition of his landmark work Social Theory and Social Structure (pp. 28, 35). Merton also introduced the less known counterpart to this concept, adumbrationism, meaning the attribution of insights, ideas or analogies absent from original works. In the process of "obliteration by incorporation", both the original idea and the literal formulations of it are forgotten due to prolonged and widespread use, and enter into everyday language (or at least the everyday language of a given academic discipline), no


id: public-opinion-on-extraterrestrial-life-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_on_extraterrestrial_life-0.md
category: reference
title: Public opinion on extraterrestrial life
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_on_extraterrestrial_life
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:22.898208+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: public-opinion-on-extraterrestrial-life-20260505-0
summary:
Public opinion on extraterrestrial life refers to the collective beliefs, attitudes, and statistical data regarding the existence of extraterrestrial life and extraterrestrial intelligence (ETI). While scientific consensus has historically been cautious, public opinion surveys from the late 20th and early 21st centuries indicate a widespread belief in the existence of intelligent alien civilizations, often exceeding the confidence levels expressed by the scientific community. == Global surveys == Research conducted on an international scale has revealed significant belief in extraterrestrial civilizations across diverse cultures. Glocalities Study (2017): A survey of 26,492 respondents across 24 countries found that 47% of participants believed in "the existence of intelligent alien civilizations in the universe." The study noted substantial cross-national variation, with belief rates ranging from 45% in the United States to 68% in Russia. The researchers categorized a segment of high-engagement believers as "Homo Universalis," a group characterized by unconventional thinking and high interest in science and politics. Western Nations Comparison (2015): A YouGov survey comparing attitudes in the United Kingdom, Germany, and the United States found that more than one in two people in all three nations believed living creatures with communication abilities exist outside Earth. Specifically, 56% of Germans, 54% of Americans,


id: science-in-society-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_In_Society-0.md
category: reference
title: Science In Society
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_In_Society
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:25.450128+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-in-society-20260505-0
summary:
Science In Society: An Introduction to Social Studies of Science (ISBN 0415321999) is a 2004 book by Massimiano Bucchi. The book explains how science works, what sociologists find to be of interest, and how scientific knowledge is produced. There are chapters on the relevance of science to contemporary life, Kuhn's work and its modern relevance, as well as the role of scientific communication. == See also == List of books about the politics of science == References ==


id: scientific-community-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_community-0.md
category: reference
title: Scientific community
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_community
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:26.759792+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: scientific-community-20260505-0
summary:
The scientific community is a diverse network of interacting scientists. It includes many "sub-communities" working on particular scientific fields, and within particular institutions; interdisciplinary and cross-institutional activities are also significant. Objectivity is expected to be achieved by the scientific method. Peer review, through discussion and debate within journals and conferences, assists in this objectivity by maintaining the quality of research methodology and interpretation of results. == History of scientific communities == The eighteenth century had some societies made up of men who studied nature, also known as natural philosophers and natural historians, which included even amateurs. As such these societies were more like local clubs and groups with diverse interests than actual scientific communities, which usually had interests on specialized disciplines. Though there were a few older societies of men who studied nature such as the Royal Society of London, the concept of scientific communities emerged in the second half of the 19th century, not before, because it was in this century that the language of modern science emerged, the professionalization of science occurred, specialized institutions were created, and the specialization of scientific disciplines and fields occurred. For instance, the term scientist was first coined by the naturalist-theologian William Whewell


id: scientific-community-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_community-1.md
category: reference
title: Scientific community
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_community
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:26.759792+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: scientific-community-20260505-0
summary:
Unlike in previous centuries when the community of scholars were all members of few learned societies and similar institutions, there are no singular bodies or individuals which can be said today to speak for all science or all scientists. This is partly due to the specialized training most scientists receive in very few fields. As a result, many would lack expertise in all the other fields of the sciences. For instance, due to the increasing complexity of information and specialization of scientists, most of the cutting-edge research today is done by well funded groups of scientists, rather than individuals. However, there are still multiple societies and academies in many countries which help consolidate some opinions and research to help guide public discussions on matters of policy and government-funded research. For example, the United States' National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and United Kingdom's Royal Society sometimes act as surrogates when the opinions of the scientific community need to be ascertained by policy makers or the national government, but the statements of the National Academy of Science or the Royal Society are not binding on scientists nor do they necessarily reflect the opinions of every scientist in a given community since membership


id: scientific-imperialism-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_imperialism-0.md
category: reference
title: Scientific imperialism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_imperialism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:27.968507+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: scientific-imperialism-20260505-0
summary:
Scientific imperialism is a term that appears to have been coined by Ellis T. Powell when addressing the Commonwealth Club of Canada on 8 September 1920. He defined imperialism as "the sense of arbitrary and capricious domination over the bodies and souls of men," he used the term "scientific imperialism" to mean "the subjection of all the developed and undeveloped powers of the earth to the mind of man." In modern usage, however, scientific imperialism refers to situations in which critics perceive science to act imperiously. Philosopher of science John Dupré described it (in his 2001 book Human Nature and the Limits of Science, p. 74) as "the tendency to push a good scientific idea far beyond the domain in which it was originally introduced, and often far beyond the domain in which it can provide much illumination." He wrote that "devotees of these approaches are inclined to claim that they are in possession not just of one useful perspective on human behavior, but of the key that will open doors to the understanding of ever wider areas of human behavior." Scientific imperialism has also been charged against "those who believe that the study of politics can and should be


id: scientific-wager-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_wager-0.md
category: reference
title: Scientific wager
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_wager
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:29.191582+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: scientific-wager-20260505-0
summary:
A scientific wager is a wager whose outcome is settled by experiment or observation, following the scientific method. It typically comprises a commitment to pay out when a currently-unknown or uncertain statement is resolved, and either proven or disproved. Some wagers have specific date restrictions for collection, but many are open. Wagers occasionally exert a powerful galvanizing effect on society and the scientific community. Notable scientists who have made scientific wagers include Stephen Hawking and Richard Feynman. The Stanford Linear Accelerator has an open book containing about 35 wagers in particle physics dating back to 1980; many are still unresolved. == Notable scientific wagers == There are many examples of scientific wagers from the past two centuries, many related to large-scale questions in science at the time. In 1870, Alfred Russel Wallace bet a flat-Earth theorist named John Hampden that he could prove the flat Earth hypothesis incorrect. The sum staked was £500 (equivalent to £62,000 in 2024). A test involving a stretch of the Old Bedford River, in Norfolk, was agreed on: Wallace measured the curvature of the canal's surface using two markers separated by about 5 km (3 mi) and suspended at equal heights above the water's surface.


id: scientific-wager-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_wager-1.md
category: reference
title: Scientific wager
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_wager
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:29.191582+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: scientific-wager-20260505-0
summary:
== See also == Long Now Foundation § Long Bet Project The efforts of photographer Eadweard Muybridge to capture the motion of a galloping horse were not part of a wager, contrary to popular opinion. Pascal's wager is not a wager in the sense used in this article. == References ==


id: sociology-of-scientific-ignorance-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_of_scientific_ignorance-0.md
category: reference
title: Sociology of scientific ignorance
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_of_scientific_ignorance
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:30.380249+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: sociology-of-scientific-ignorance-20260505-0
summary:
The sociology of scientific ignorance (SSI) is the study of ignorance in and of science. The most common way is to see ignorance as something relevant, rather than simply lack of knowledge. There are two distinct areas in which SSI is being studied: some focus on ignorance in scientific research, whereas others focus on public ignorance of science. Sociology of scientific ignorance is a complementary field to the sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK). When studying ignorance in scientific research, the common standpoint is that ignorance can be used as a tool in science. An example of this is blackboxing, which is the notion that it can be beneficial to hide the internal parts of a system, and only make the input and output visible to the user. Studies of public ignorance of science focuses on how scientific ignorance can affect society, the public view of science, and what can give rise to public ignorance of science. This area is related to public understanding of science. == Ignorance in scientific research == Generally, the word ignorance has a negative tone to it, and for a long time scientific ignorance was viewed as a purely negative thing. Recently, however, people have started


id: sociology-of-scientific-knowledge-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_of_scientific_knowledge-0.md
category: reference
title: Sociology of scientific knowledge
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_of_scientific_knowledge
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:31.615235+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: sociology-of-scientific-knowledge-20260505-0
summary:
The sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK) is the study of science as a social activity, especially dealing with "the social conditions and effects of science, and with the social structures and processes of scientific activity." The sociology of scientific ignorance (SSI) is complementary to the sociology of scientific knowledge. For comparison, the sociology of knowledge studies the impact of human knowledge and the prevailing ideas on societies and relations between knowledge and the social context within which it arises. Sociologists of scientific knowledge study the development of a scientific field and attempt to identify points of contingency or interpretative flexibility where ambiguities are present. Such variations may be linked to a variety of political, historical, cultural or economic factors. Crucially, the field does not set out to promote relativism or to attack the scientific project; the objective of the researcher is to explain why one interpretation rather than another succeeds due to external social and historical circumstances. The field emerged in the late 1960s and early 1970s and at first was an almost exclusively British practice. Other early centers for the development of the field were in France, Germany, and the United States (notably at Cornell University). Major theorists include


id: sociology-of-scientific-knowledge-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_of_scientific_knowledge-1.md
category: reference
title: Sociology of scientific knowledge
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_of_scientific_knowledge
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:31.615235+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: sociology-of-scientific-knowledge-20260505-0
summary:
== Further reading == Baez, John (2010). "The Bogdanoff Affair". Bloor, David (1976) Knowledge and social imagery. London: Routledge. Bloor, David (1999) "Anti-Latour". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A Volume 30, Issue 1, March 1999, Pages 81–112. Chu, Dominique (2013), The Science Myth---God, society, the self and what we will never know, ISBN 1782790470 Collins, H.M. (1975) The seven sexes: A study in the sociology of a phenomenon, or the replication of experiments in physics, Sociology, 9, 205-24. Collins, H.M. (1985). Changing order: Replication and induction in scientific practice. London: Sage. Collins, Harry and Steven Yearley. (1992). "Epistemological Chicken" in Science as Practice and Culture, A. Pickering (ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 301-326. Edwards, D., Ashmore, M. & Potter, J. (1995). Death and furniture: The rhetoric, politics, and theology of bottom line arguments against relativism. History of the Human Sciences, 8, 25-49. Fleck, Ludwik (1935). Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache. Einführung in die Lehre vom Denkstil und Denkkollektiv [Emergence and development of a scientific fact: Introduction to the study of thinking style and thinking collectives] (in German). Verlagsbuchhandlung, Basel: Schwabe. Fleck, Ludwik (1979). Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago, Illinois: University of


id: spanish-language-in-science-and-technology-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_language_in_science_and_technology-0.md
category: reference
title: Spanish language in science and technology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_language_in_science_and_technology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:32.928632+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: spanish-language-in-science-and-technology-20260505-0
summary:
The Spanish language is used in diverse areas of science and technology. Despite its large number of speakers, the Spanish language does not feature prominently in scientific writing, with the exception of the humanities. One estimate puts the percentage of Spanish language publications in natural sciences and technology as 0.5% of the world total, a low number since Spanish is often considered to rank second or third among languages in various other metrics and estimates. In the humanities, a similar estimate yields 2.81%. Summarizing the status of the Spanish language in the sciences, researcher Álvaro Cabezas writes: "No serious scientist publishes his best works in a language other than English". The creation of new Spanish terminology is more a result of translating concepts from other languages than of crafting original ideas. == Bibliometric studies == Among Spanish-language articles indexed in Scopus from 1996 to 2011, 10.8% qualify as "Life Sciences", 13.2% as "Physical Sciences", 44.4% as "Health Sciences", 29.6% as "Social Sciences, Arts & Humanities", and 2.0% as "Multi-disciplinary & Undefined". Thus, a higher percentage of Spanish language content is published in "Health Sciences" and "Social Sciences, Arts & Humanities" than in English, Chinese, or Russian. Spanish shares this trait


id: theories-of-technology-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_technology-0.md
category: reference
title: Theories of technology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_technology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:34.104433+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: theories-of-technology-20260505-0
summary:
Theories of technological change and innovation attempt to explain the factors that shape technological innovation as well as the impact of technology on society and culture. Some of the most contemporary theories of technological change reject two of the previous views: the linear model of technological innovation and other, the technological determinism. To challenge the linear model, some of today's theories of technological change and innovation point to the history of technology, where they find evidence that technological innovation often gives rise to new scientific fields, and emphasizes the important role that social networks and cultural values play in creating and shaping technological artifacts. To challenge the so-called "technological determinism", today's theories of technological change emphasize the scope of the need of technical choice, which they find to be greater than most laypeople can realize; as scientists in philosophy of science, and further science and technology often like to say about this "It could have been different." For this reason, theorists who take these positions often argue that a greater public involvement in technological decision-making is desired. == Sociological theories == Sociological theories and researches of the Society and the Social focus on how human and technology actually interact and


id: theories-of-technology-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_technology-1.md
category: reference
title: Theories of technology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_technology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:34.104433+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: theories-of-technology-20260505-0
summary:
=== Approaches of the critical theory === Critical theory attempts, according to some, to go beyond the descriptiveness of one account that may show of how things are, the exam and question of why they have come to be that way and how they might otherwise be. Critical theory asks whose interests are being served by the questioned status quo and assesses the potentials of a future, that alternates and propose "to better" both the technological service, and even social justice. Here Geuss's definition is given, where "a critical theory, then, is a reflective theory which gives agents a kind of knowledge inherently productive of enlightenment and emancipation" (1964). Thus Marcuse argued that while technology matters and design are often presented as neutral technical choices, in fact, they manifest political or moral values. Critical theory is seen as a "form of archaeology" that attempt to get beneath common-sense understandings in order to reveal the power relationships and interests determining particular technological configuration and use. Perhaps the most developed contemporary critical theory of technology is contained in the works of Andrew Feenberg included in his book 'Transforming Technology' (2002). Values in Design asks how do we ensure a place for values


id: theories-of-technology-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_technology-2.md
category: reference
title: Theories of technology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_technology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:34.104433+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: theories-of-technology-20260505-0
summary:
=== Other Stances === Additionally, many authors have posed technology so as to critique and or emphasize aspects of technology as addressed by the mainline theories. For example, Steve Woolgar (1991) considers technology as text in order to critique the sociology of scientific knowledge as applied to technology and to distinguish between three responses to that notion: the instrumental response (interpretive flexibility), the interpretivist response (environmental/organizational influences), the reflexive response (a double hermeneutic). Pfaffenberger (1992) treats technology as drama to argue that a recursive structuring of technological artifacts and their social structure discursively regulate the technological construction of political power. A technological drama is a discourse of technological "statements" and "counterstatements" within the processes of technological regularization, adjustment, and reconstitution. An important philosophical approach to technology has been taken by Bernard Stiegler, whose work has been influenced by other philosophers and historians of technology including Gilbert Simondon and André Leroi-Gourhan. In the Schumpeterian and Neo-Schumpeterian theories technologies are critical factors of economic growth (Carlota Perez). == Analytical theories == There are theories of technological change and innovation which are not defined or claimed by a proponent, but are used by authors in describing existing literature, in contrast to their own


id: western-esotericism-and-science-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_esotericism_and_science-0.md
category: reference
title: Western esotericism and science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_esotericism_and_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:35.422106+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: western-esotericism-and-science-20260505-0
summary:
The relationship between Western esotericism and science (and particularly the origins of experimental science) is a historiographical overview intersecting academic study of Western esotericism and history of science about how learned esoteric currents (e.g., natural magic, alchemy, hermeticism) interacted with natural philosophy, artisanal knowledge, and later scientific institutions from Antiquity to the twentieth century. It summarizes major debates (e.g., the “Yates thesis”), the role of printing and learned/artisanal networks, and the transformations that led from alchemy and chymistry to early modern chemistry, it also traces nineteenth–twentieth-century continuities in mesmerism, spiritualism, and psychical research. == Scope and definitions == The scope covers learned currents conventionally grouped under Western esotericism and their interactions with natural-philosophical, artisanal, and later scientific practices. In current scholarship, “Western esotericism” functions as an analytic label devised by historians of ideas rather than a stable emic category across periods. Within this remit fall astrology (including astral/astrological magic), alchemy/chymistry, hermetic and theurgic philosophies, “natural magic”, Christian Kabbalah and related Christianized appropriations, and selected nineteenth–twentieth-century continuities (e.g., mesmerism, spiritualisms, psychical research) insofar as they engaged scientific methods, publics, or institutions. Following standard usage, esotericism is treated as a family-resemblance category centered on literate, textually mediated, often elite discourses and practices,


id: western-esotericism-and-science-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_esotericism_and_science-1.md
category: reference
title: Western esotericism and science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_esotericism_and_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:35.422106+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: western-esotericism-and-science-20260505-0
summary:
=== From natural magic to infrastructures of credibility === Historians of ideas have charted the forms and fortunes of natural magic and learned magic from the Middle Ages through the seventeenth century, emphasizing ontologies of hidden properties, sympathies, and imaginal techniques, and their philosophical justifications and critics. Parallel research in the social history of science highlights infrastructures that filtered claims: manuscript and print circuits (including books of secrets), the Republic of Letters, early academies and learned societies, and the emergence of publication regimes such as the Philosophical Transactions. === Boundary-work and demarcation === Sociological approaches analyze how scientific communities drew boundaries against “occult” topics through norms of civility, replicable evidence, and credit allocation. Such “boundary-work” helps to explain why some esoteric claims were domesticated (e.g., elements of chemical practice) while others were marginalized, rebranded, or expelled. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, studies of animal magnetism, spiritualism, and psychical research show continued negotiations at the edges of emerging disciplines, from clinics and laboratories to voluntary associations. === Long nineteenth century: disenchantment and “scientification” === Recent work situates esotericism within broader narratives of secularization and the reconfiguration of “religion” and “science.” One line of analysis tracks how scientific naturalism rearticulated


id: western-esotericism-and-science-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_esotericism_and_science-2.md
category: reference
title: Western esotericism and science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_esotericism_and_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:35.422106+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: western-esotericism-and-science-20260505-0
summary:
=== Recipe literature and channels of diffusion === Technical books and compilations of “books of secrets” connected artisanal practice with learned theorizing, creating conduits that printers would later expand in the Renaissance. These manuals aggregated procedures for dyes, metallurgy, pharmacology, and image-making and helped form publics attuned to experiment, collection, and disclosure. === Scholastic uptake and debate === The influx of Arabic–Latin materials reshaped natural-philosophical vocabularies and controversies. Astronomical and medical applications of astrology, debates over hidden properties, and programmatic alchemical claims were selectively integrated into university teaching and commentary while also provoking clerical scrutiny—setting the stage for later medieval distinctions between licit “natural” explanations and illicit invocations. == Medieval Latin world (11th–15th centuries) == Between the eleventh and fifteenth centuries, the Latin West integrated translated corpora on astrology, alchemy, and learned magic into monastic, scholastic, and urban settings, while developing classifications later grouped under the “occult sciences.” Texts such as the Latin Picatrix, the Pseudo-Geber alchemical corpus, lapidaries, and image-magic handbooks circulated alongside natural-philosophical commentaries, medical compendia, and technical recipes. === Monastic collections and clerical readership === Monastic libraries and clerical readers preserved and annotated works on natural and ritual magic even as ecclesiastical norms constrained their use. Collections


id: western-esotericism-and-science-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_esotericism_and_science-3.md
category: reference
title: Western esotericism and science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_esotericism_and_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:35.422106+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: western-esotericism-and-science-20260505-0
summary:
Seventeenth-century practitioners reorganized late medieval and Renaissance repertoires into a mixed enterprise of alchemy and chemistry often labeled chymistry. Workshops and purpose-built laboratories standardized instruments (furnaces, crucibles, retorts, alembics) and procedures (calcination, distillation, sublimation, solution, precipitation), linking material operations to questions about analysis, composition, and medical utility. Programmatic attacks on Galenic medicine and defenses of chemical remedies by Paracelsian physicians fed a therapeutic and analytical turn that coexisted with transmutational ambitions. === Case-studies and overlapping repertoires === Studies of individual practitioners complicate linear stories of “disenchantment.” George Starkey (Eirenaeus Philalethes) developed furnace designs, protocols, and reagents that circulated widely; his collaboration and exchanges with Robert Boyle show how alchemical goals and experimental norms interpenetrated. Boyle’s experimental program drew on chymical skill and recipes while articulating new rhetorical and methodological expectations for public witnessing and replication, often highlighted in accounts of early modern experimental culture. At the mathematical end of natural philosophy, Isaac Newton pursued extensive alchemical reading and laboratory work—on metallic generation, “vegetation,” and the ignis secretus—integrating them with his broader investigations of nature. Rather than a clean break, scholarship depicts a spectrum of overlap in ends (medicine, analysis, perfection), media (glassware, heat management), and genres (notebooks, “secrets,” experimental reports)


id: western-esotericism-and-science-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_esotericism_and_science-4.md
category: reference
title: Western esotericism and science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_esotericism_and_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:35.422106+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: western-esotericism-and-science-20260505-0
summary:
=== Egyptosophy and Egyptology === Scholars use the term Egyptosophy (Ägyptosophie) to denote the early-modern and modern Western construction of “ancient Egypt” as a reservoir of esoteric wisdom, a lineage that runs from late antique Hermeticism through Renaissance and Baroque syntheses and into nineteenth- and twentieth-century occult revivals. Within the historiography of science, this Egyptosophic imaginary is treated as a cultural precursor rather than a scientific ancestor: it sustained attention, collecting practices, and interpretive expectations (for example, Athanasius Kircher’s ambitious but largely erroneous readings), and it fed the broader current often labeled egyptomania. By contrast, Egyptology emerged in the 1820s as a distinct scholarly field grounded in philology and archaeology, following Jean-François Champollion’s phonetic decipherment of hieroglyphs (1822). In this sense, the relationship between Egyptosophy and Egyptology can be described—analogously to Astrology and Astronomy, or Alchemy and Chemistry—as a historical bifurcation: they share an object (ancient Egypt) and some early impulses, but diverge in method, evidentiary standards, and aims (soteriological and allegorical readings versus critical historicization and language-based analysis). Historians of science also interpret this shift as an instance of disciplinary boundary-making within the broader demarcation of science from non-science. == Nineteenth century: animal magnetism, spiritualisms, psychologies == Across the


id: western-esotericism-and-science-20260505-5
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_esotericism_and_science-5.md
category: reference
title: Western esotericism and science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_esotericism_and_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:35.422106+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: western-esotericism-and-science-20260505-0
summary:
== Works cited == Asprem, Egil (2014). The Problem of Disenchantment: Scientific Naturalism and Esoteric Discourse, 1900–1939. Leiden: Brill. Copenhaver, Brian P. (1992). Hermetica: The Greek Corpus Hermeticum and the Latin Asclepius. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Copenhaver, Brian P. (2015). Magic in Western Culture: From Antiquity to the Enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Daston, Lorraine; Park, Katharine (1998). Wonders and the Order of Nature, 1150–1750. New York: Zone Books. Dear, Peter (2001). Revolutionizing the Sciences: European Knowledge and Its Ambitions, 1500–1700. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Debus, Allen G. (1977). The Chemical Philosophy: Paracelsian Science and Medicine in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. New York: Science History Publications. Eamon, William (1994). Science and the Secrets of Nature: Books of Secrets in Medieval and Early Modern Culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Faivre, Antoine (1994). Access to Western Esotericism. Albany: SUNY Press. Findlen, Paula (1994). Possessing Nature: Museums, Collecting, and Scientific Culture in Early Modern Italy. Berkeley: University of California Press. Fowden, Garth (1986). The Egyptian Hermes: A Historical Approach to the Late Pagan Mind. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Gieryn, Thomas F. (1999). Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Gieryn, Thomas F. (1983). "Boundary-Work and the


id: yuasa-phenomenon-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuasa_Phenomenon-0.md
category: reference
title: Yuasa Phenomenon
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuasa_Phenomenon
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:36.593645+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: yuasa-phenomenon-20260505-0
summary:
The Yuasa Phenomenon, named after Japanese physicist and science historian Mitsutomo Yuasa (sometimes referred to as Mintomo Yuasa), suggests that, in the modern era, the world center of scientific activity (defined as producing more than 25% of the world's scientific achievements) moves from one country to another about every 80–100 years. == Analysis == Analyzed data indicate that the "modern world science centre has shifted from Italy (1504–1610) to the United Kingdom (1660–1750), to France (1760– 1840), to Germany (1875–1920), and to the United States (1920 to the present)." This phenomenon and its study methodology are an emerging scientometrics study area. Indicators point to China's rise as a world center of scientific activity. This phenomenon is also described by other names, including "the Bernal—Yuasa phenomenon". Shigeo Minowa links Yuasa's finding to Joseph Ben-David's movements of Centers of Learning. Ben-David's Centers of Learning migration observations are discussed in various works. == See also == Historic recurrence History of science == References ==


id: science-studies-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_studies-0.md
category: reference
title: Science studies
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_studies
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:38.187877+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-studies-20260505-0
summary:
Science studies is an interdisciplinary research area that seeks to situate scientific expertise in broad social, historical, and philosophical contexts. It uses various methods to analyze the production, representation and reception of scientific knowledge and its epistemic and semiotic role. Similarly to cultural studies, science studies are defined by the subject of their research and encompass a large range of different theoretical and methodological perspectives and practices. The interdisciplinary approach may include and borrow methods from the humanities, natural and formal sciences, from scientometrics to ethnomethodology or cognitive science. Science studies have a certain importance for evaluation and science policy. Overlapping with the field of science, technology and society, practitioners study the relationship between science and technology, and the interaction of expert and lay knowledge in the public realm. == Scope == The field started with a tendency toward navel-gazing: it was extremely self-conscious in its genesis and applications. From early concerns with scientific discourse, practitioners soon started to deal with the relation of scientific expertise to politics and lay people. Practical examples include bioethics, bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), pollution, global warming, biomedical sciences, physical sciences, natural hazard predictions, the (alleged) impact of the Chernobyl disaster in the UK, generation


id: science-studies-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_studies-1.md
category: reference
title: Science studies
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_studies
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:38.187877+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-studies-20260505-0
summary:
Until now there has been no science that describes the means for making discoveries and inventions, and the generality of people, as well as many people of learning, believe that there never will be. This is an error. Someday a science of making discoveries and inventions will exist and will render services. It will arise not all at once; first only its general outline will appear, which subsequent researchers will correct and elaborate, and which still later researchers will apply to individual branches of knowledge. It is striking that, while early 20th-century sociologist proponents of a discipline to study science and its practitioners wrote in general theoretical terms, Prus had already half a century earlier described, with many specific examples, the scope and methods of such a discipline. Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) increased interest both in the history of science and in science's philosophical underpinnings. Kuhn posited that the history of science was less a linear succession of discoveries than a succession of paradigms within the philosophy of science. Paradigms are broader, socio-intellectual constructs that determine which types of truth claims are permissible. Science studies seeks to identify key dichotomies – such as those between science and


id: science-studies-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_studies-2.md
category: reference
title: Science studies
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_studies
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:38.187877+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-studies-20260505-0
summary:
Donovan et al. (2012) used social studies of volcanology to investigate the generation of knowledge and expert advice on various active volcanoes. It contains a survey of volcanologists carried out during 2008 and 2009 and interviews with scientists in the UK, Montserrat, Italy and Iceland during fieldwork seasons. Donovan et al. (2012) asked the experts about the felt purpose of volcanology and what they considered the most important eruptions in historical time. The survey tries to identify eruptions that had an influence on volcanology as a science and to assess the role of scientists in policymaking. A main focus was on the impact of the Montserrat eruption 1997. The eruption, a classical example of the black swan theory directly killed (only) 19 persons. However the outbreak had major impacts on the local society and destroyed important infrastructure, as the island's airport. About 7,000 people, or two-thirds of the population, left Montserrat; 4,000 to the United Kingdom. The Montserrat case put immense pressure on volcanologists, as their expertise suddenly became the primary driver of various public policy approaches. The science studies approach provided valuable insights in that situation. There were various miscommunications among scientists. Matching scientific uncertainty (typical of volcanic unrest)


id: actor-network-theory-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor–network_theory-0.md
category: reference
title: Actor–network theory
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor–network_theory
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:39.392839+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: actor-network-theory-20260505-0
summary:
Actor–network theory (ANT) is a theoretical and methodological approach to social theory where everything in the social and natural worlds exists in constantly shifting networks of relationships. It posits that nothing exists outside those relationships. All the factors involved in a social situation are on the same level, and thus there are no external social forces beyond what and how the network participants interact at present. Thus, objects, ideas, processes, and any other relevant factors are seen as just as important in creating social situations as humans. ANT holds that social forces do not exist in themselves, and therefore cannot be used to explain social phenomena. Instead, strictly empirical analysis should be undertaken to "describe" rather than "explain" social activity. Only after this can one introduce the concept of social forces, and only as an abstract theoretical concept, not something which genuinely exists in the world. Although it is best known for its controversial insistence on the capacity of nonhumans to act or participate in systems or networks or both, ANT is also associated with forceful critiques of conventional and critical sociology. Developed by science and technology studies (STS) scholars Michel Callon, Madeleine Akrich and Bruno Latour, the sociologist John


id: actor-network-theory-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor–network_theory-1.md
category: reference
title: Actor–network theory
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor–network_theory
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:39.392839+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: actor-network-theory-20260505-0
summary:
==== Human actors ==== Human normally refers to human beings and their human behaviors. ==== Nonhuman actors ==== Traditionally, nonhuman entities are creatures including plants, animals, geology, and natural forces, as well as a collective human making of arts, languages. In ANT, nonhuman covers multiple entities including things, objects, animals, natural phenomena, material structures, transportation devices, texts, and economic goods. But nonhuman actors do not cover entities such as humans, supernatural beings, and other symbolic objects in nature. === Actor-Network === As the term implies, the actor-network is the central concept in ANT. The term "network" is somewhat problematic in that it, as Latour notes, has a number of unwanted connotations. Firstly, it implies that what is described takes the shape of a network, which is not necessarily the case. Secondly, it implies "transportation without deformation," which, in ANT, is not possible since any actor-network involves a vast number of translations. Latour, however, still contends that network is a fitting term to use, because "it has no a priori order relation; it is not tied to the axiological myth of a top and of a bottom of society; it makes absolutely no assumption whether a specific locus is macro- or


id: actor-network-theory-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor–network_theory-2.md
category: reference
title: Actor–network theory
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor–network_theory
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:39.392839+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: actor-network-theory-20260505-0
summary:
=== Quasi-object === For the rethinking of social relations as networks, Latour mobilizes a concept from Michel Serres and expands on it in order “to locate the position of these strange new hybrids”. Quasi-objects are simultaneously quasi-subjects – the prefix quasi denotes that neither ontological status as subject or object is pure or permanent, but that these are dynamic entities whose status shifts, depending on their respective momentous activity and their according position in a collective or network. What is decisive is circulation and participation, from which networks emerge, examples for quasi-objects are language, money, bread, love, or the ball in a soccer game: all of these human or non-human, material or immaterial actants have no agency (and thus, subject-status) in themselves, however, they can be seen as the connective tissue underlying – or even activating – the interactions in which they are enmeshed. In Reassembling the Social, Latour refers to these in-between actants as “the mediators whose proliferation generates, among many other entities, what could be called quasi-objects and quasi-subjects.” Actor–network theory refers to these creations as tokens or quasi-objects which are passed between actors within the network. As the token is increasingly transmitted or passed through the network,


id: actor-network-theory-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor–network_theory-3.md
category: reference
title: Actor–network theory
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor–network_theory
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:39.392839+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: actor-network-theory-20260505-0
summary:
=== International relations === Actor–network theory has become increasingly prominent within the discipline of international relations and political science. Theoretically, scholars within IR have employed ANT in order to disrupt traditional world political binaries (civilised/barbarian, democratic/autocratic, etc.), consider the implications of a posthuman understanding of IR, explore the infrastructures of world politics, and consider the effects of technological agency. Empirically, IR scholars have drawn on insights from ANT in order to study phenomena including political violences like the use of torture and drones, piracy and maritime governance, and garbage. === Design === The actor–network theory can also be applied to design, using a perspective that is not simply limited to an analysis of an object's structure. From the ANT viewpoint, design is seen as a series of features that account for a social, psychological, and economical world. ANT argues that objects are designed to shape human action and mold or influence decisions. In this way, the objects' design serves to mediate human relationships and can even impact our morality, ethics, and politics. === Literary criticism === The literary critic Rita Felski has argued that ANT offers the fields of literary criticism and cultural studies vital new modes of interpreting and


id: actor-network-theory-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor–network_theory-4.md
category: reference
title: Actor–network theory
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor–network_theory
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:39.392839+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: actor-network-theory-20260505-0
summary:
Nonhuman actors can be considered as a condition in human social activities. Through the human's formation of nonhuman actors such as durable materials, they provide a stable foundation for interactions in society. Reciprocally, nonhumans' actions and capacities serve as a condition for the possibility of the formation of society. In Latour's We Have Never Been Modern, his conceptual "parliament of things" consists of social, natural, and discourse together as hybrids. Although the interlocks between human actors and nonhumans effects the modernized society, this parliamentary setting based on nonhuman actors would eliminate such fake modernization, and changes the dichotomy between modern society and premodern society. Nonhuman actors can be considered as mediators. On the one hand, nonhumans could constantly modify relations between actors. On the other hand, nonhumans share the same features with other actors not solely as means for human actors. In this circumstance, nonhuman actors impact human interactions. It either creates an atmosphere for humans to agree with each other, or lead to conflict as the mediators. It is noticeable that the status of mediation is more affiliated with intermediaries or means as a stable presence in the corpus of ANT, while mediators function more powers to influence actors


id: actor-network-theory-20260505-5
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor–network_theory-5.md
category: reference
title: Actor–network theory
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor–network_theory
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:39.392839+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: actor-network-theory-20260505-0
summary:
== See also == Annemarie Mol Helen Verran Mapping controversies Science and technology studies (STS) Obligatory passage point (OPP) Social construction of technology (SCOT) Technology dynamics Theory of structuration (according to which neither agents nor social structure have primacy) Thing theory Outline of organizational theory == References == == Further reading == Carroll, N., Whelan, E., and Richardson, I. (2012). Service Science – an Actor Network Theory Approach. International Journal of Actor-Network Theory and Technological Innovation (IJANTTI), Volume 4, Number 3, pp. 52–70. Carroll, N. (2014). Actor-Network Theory: A Bureaucratic View of Public Service Innovation. Chapter 7, p. 115-144. In Ed Tatnall (ed). Technological Advancements and the Impact of Actor-Network Theory, IGI Global. Online version of the article "On Actor Network Theory: A Few Clarifications", in which Latour responds to criticisms. Archived 2021-04-26 at the Wayback Machine Introductory article "Dolwick, JS. 2009. The 'Social' and Beyond: Introducing Actor–Network Theory", which includes an analysis of other social theories ANThology. Ein einführendes Handbuch zur Akteur–Netzwerk-Theorie, von Andréa Belliger und David Krieger, transcript Verlag (German) Transhumanism as Actor-Network Theory "N00bz & the Actor-Network: Transhumanist Traductions" Archived 2010-10-08 at the Wayback Machine (Humanity+ Magazine) by Woody Evans. John Law (1992). "Notes on the Theory


id: against-method-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method-0.md
category: reference
title: Against Method
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:40.563043+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: against-method-20260505-0
summary:
Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge is a 1975 book by Austrian philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend. The central thesis of the book is that science should become an anarchic enterprise. In the context of the work, the term "anarchy" refers to epistemological anarchy, which does not remain within one single prescriptive scientific method on the grounds that any such method would restrict scientific progress. The work is notable in the history and philosophy of science partially due to its detailed case study of Galileo's hypothesis that the earth rotates on its axis and has since become a staple reading in introduction to philosophy of science courses at undergraduate and graduate levels. Against Method contains many verbatim excerpts from Feyerabend's earlier papers including "Explanation, Reduction, and Empiricism", "How to be a Good Empiricist: A Plea for Tolerance in Matters Epistemological", and "Problems of Empiricism, Part I." Because of this, Feyerabend claims that "[Against Method] is not a book, it is a collage." Later editions of Against Method included passages from Science in a Free Society. == Publication, Translations, and Editions == Feyerabend began writing Against Method in 1968 and it was originally released as a long paper


id: against-method-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method-1.md
category: reference
title: Against Method
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:40.563043+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: against-method-20260505-0
summary:
=== Counterinduction === Feyerabend contends that for every methodological rule, there is a 'counter rule' – namely, a methodological rule that recommends the opposite of its counter – which also has value. As an example of this general hypothesis, Feyerabend defends 'counterinduction' as the counter rule to inductivism and "induction by falsification" as a valuable methodological rule. Counterinduction involves developing theories that are inconsistent with currently accepted empirical evidence, which is the opposite of the (then) commonly accepted rule that theories should be developed that are consistent with known facts. Feyerabend argues for counterinduction by showing that theories that conflict with known facts are useful for revealing 'natural interpretations' which must be made explicit so that they can be examined. Natural interpretations are interpretations of experience, expressed in language, that follow automatically and unconsciously from describing observations. After a theory has been accepted for a long period of time, it becomes habit to describe events or processes using certain concepts. Because, Feyerabend argues, observation underdetermines the ways we describe what we observe, theories that redescribe experience in new ways force us to make comparisons between old natural interpretations and new ones. This is the first step to evaluating the plausibility


id: against-method-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method-2.md
category: reference
title: Against Method
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:40.563043+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: against-method-20260505-0
summary:
=== Galileo case study === The primary case study in Against Method is Galileo's hypothesis that the earth rotates on its axis. According to Feyerabend's reconstruction, Galileo did not justify this hypothesis by reference to known facts, nor did he offer an unfalsified conjecture that had more empirical content than its predecessor. Rather, Galileo's hypothesis would rationally have been considered to be false by the existing evidence at the time, and it is lower in empirical content than Aristotelian theory of motion. Moreover, Galileo did not provide arguments to justify his contention but instead used propaganda. According to the existing evidence in the early 17th century, the position that the earth rotates on its axis would have rightly been regarded as false. For example, Galileo's theory of the tides suggested by the motion of the earth was inaccurate and the differences "were big enough to be known even to the most bleary-eyed sailor." In addition, the motion of the earth on its axis leads to the wrong predictions of the relative brightness of Mars and Venus when measured with the naked eye. To correct for these mistakes, Galileo introduces new evidence through his telescope. However, the telescope was not theoretically


id: against-method-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method-3.md
category: reference
title: Against Method
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:40.563043+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: against-method-20260505-0
summary:
=== Discovery/justification distinction === Herbert Feigl criticizes Feyerabend's earlier work, including the paper edition of Against Method, for conflating the distinction between the context of discovery and the context of justification. According to this distinction, formulated by Hans Reichenbach and Karl Popper, there is no logic about how scientists develop scientific theories but there should be a logic of confirming or disconfirming scientific theories. Once this distinction is accepted, then Feyerabend's claim that 'anything goes' would be a truism and would not run against logical empiricism. Feyerabend's response in Against Method is to reject the validity of the discovery/justification distinction. He argues that while the distinction can be maintained abstractly, it does not find a "point of attack" in scientific practice. This is because the two contexts are not separated in different phases of scientific research but are always comingled. Discounting evidence, for example is often necessary for scientific discovery but is rejected when seeking justification. Justifying scientific theories has implications for what research is conducted and, therefore, questions about what is justified also affects the paths open to discovery. === Criticism of Lakatos === The first edition of Against Method contains a chapter devoted to critically discussing Lakatos' methodology


id: against-method-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method-4.md
category: reference
title: Against Method
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:40.563043+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: against-method-20260505-0
summary:
== Aftermath == Feyerabend responded to these criticisms in several follow-up publications, many of which he collected in Science in a Free Society. He was extremely frustrated by the quality of the reviews of Against Method, leading him to accuse them of illiteracy and a lack of competence. In his autobiography, he writes that he sometimes wishes that "he had never written that fucking book." This response led to Feyerabend's gradual removal from the academic community which also corresponded to changes of research topics in his work in the 1980s. == References == == Further reading == The first, 1970 edition, is available for download in pdf form from the Minnesota Center for Philosophy of Science (part of the University of Minnesota). Follow this link path: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science > 4. Analyses of Theories & Methods of Physics and Psychology. 1970. Editors: M. Radner and S. Winokur > Open Access > Under the "Whoops!" message click 'Download' From the resulting file '4_Theories&Methods.zip' you need the three Feyerabend sections, 4_2_1_Feyerabend.pdf, 4_2_2_Feyerabend.pdf, 4_2_3_Feyerabend.pdf and the immediate following article on A Picture Theory of Theory Meaning (sic) (4_3_Hanson.pdf) in order to get the complete set of footnotes. Discussion of


id: applied-epistemology-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_epistemology-0.md
category: reference
title: Applied epistemology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_epistemology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:41.742535+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: applied-epistemology-20260505-0
summary:
Applied epistemology refers to the study that determines whether the systems of investigation that seek the truth lead to true beliefs about the world. A specific conceptualization cites that it attempts to reveal whether these systems contribute to epistemic aims. It is applied in practices outside of philosophy like science and mathematics. Once applied epistemology is described as a method in an epistemological search, it implies that the methodology is supported by an epistemological foundation. == Background == Applied epistemology forms part of the concept of "applied philosophy" as theorists begin to distinguish it from "applied ethics". It is argued that "applied philosophy" is a broader field, and that it has parts that are not subdisciplines of applied ethics. The emergence of "applied philosophy" gained traction after it was proposed that philosophy can be applied to contemporary issues. Applied epistemology emerged from epistemologists routine examinations that determine whether truth-seeking practices like science and mathematics are capable of delivering truths. It draws from epistemological theorizing to address pressing epistemic matters of practical value. An epistemological question assumes a philosophical form once it deals with the type of knowledge or justification that is presupposed in most ordinary contexts. In its infancy, applied


id: applied-epistemology-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_epistemology-1.md
category: reference
title: Applied epistemology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_epistemology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:41.742535+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: applied-epistemology-20260505-0
summary:
=== Informal logic === According to Mark Battersby, the method of critical thinking or informal logic can be considered a form of applied epistemology. This method involves the assessment of the strength of evidences that afford conclusions can only be made if the domain within which the argument is presented is taken into account. For Battersby, this constitutes applied epistemology, since it is about grounding assessments of arguments as they occur within them. Mark Weinstein maintained that a focus on the account of how acceptability is transmitted from premises to conclusion show close theoretical parallel between informal logic and applied epistemology. It is argued that rather than rules of logic, epistemological norms constitute the philosophical core of informal logic and that there is a close parallel between informal logic and applied ethics. Based on these factors, scholars such as Battersby and Weinstein maintain that informal logic should be classified as applied epistemology instead of logic. === Social issues === It has been suggested by scholars such as Jennifer Lackey that applied epistemology provides the tools in contemporary epistemology's evaluation of the issues of social concern. It is relevant to issues affecting social groups since it helps in answering the recurring


id: biology-and-political-science-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_political_science-0.md
category: reference
title: Biology and political science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_political_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:42.979382+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: biology-and-political-science-20260505-0
summary:
The interdisciplinary study of biology and political science is the application of theories and methods from the field of biology toward the scientific understanding of political behavior. The field is sometimes called biopolitics, a term that will be used in this article as a synonym although it has other, less related meanings. More generally, the field has also been called "politics and the life sciences". == History == During the 19th century, some scholars and philosophers made attempts to apply concepts derived from the natural sciences in the understanding of society and politics. This was greatly influenced by positivism and Darwinism. In The Social Organism (1860), Herbert Spencer compares society fo a living organism, he states that just like biological species evolve through natural selection, societies evolve through analogous processes. Another proponent of Social Darwinism, was Francis Galton, Darwin's nephew, whose ideas were the basis of behaviourial genetics and eugenics. He claimed that mental qualities (genius and talent), just like physical traits, where inherited among generations of people. He claimed that society should change so that heredity was a conscious decision, to avoid both over-breeding by less fit members of society and the under-breeding of the more fit ones. In


id: bold-hypothesis-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bold_hypothesis-0.md
category: reference
title: Bold hypothesis
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bold_hypothesis
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:44.231722+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: bold-hypothesis-20260505-0
summary:
Bold hypothesis (or bold conjecture, the terms are used interchangeably) is a concept originally created by the liberal philosopher Karl Popper when he tried to define the meaning of scientific thinking and scientific progress. It was first explained in his debut The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1935) and subsequently elaborated in writings such as Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge (1963), Objective knowledge: an evolutionary approach (1972), and Replies to my critics (1974). In successive texts written in the course of four decades, Popper added some nuances to the definition of the concept. Broadly speaking, the idea of a bold hypothesis refers to a new, testable theoretical proposition (or theoretical claim) made within a subject area which, if it is true, would be able to explain and predict much more about the subject than was previously possible. It would significantly alter existing scientific understandings about the subject, in a positive way. The new idea would be very useful for scientific research about the subject. This contrasts with other types of scientific claims which, if they turn out to be true, make little difference to what scientists already know about the subject. The contrary of a bold hypothesis is


id: bold-hypothesis-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bold_hypothesis-1.md
category: reference
title: Bold hypothesis
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bold_hypothesis
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:44.231722+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: bold-hypothesis-20260505-0
summary:
”There is a reality behind the world as it appears to us, possibly a many-layered reality, of which the appearances are the outermost layers. What the great scientist does is boldly to guess, daringly to conjecture, what these inner realities are like. (…) The boldness can be gauged by the distance between the world of appearance and the conjectured reality, the explanatory hypotheses. But there is another, a special kind of boldness – the boldness of predicting aspects of the world of appearance which so far have been overlooked but which it must possess if the conjectured reality is (more or less) right, if the explanatory hypotheses are (approximately) true. It is this more special kind of boldness which I have usually in mind when I speak of bold scientific conjectures. It is the boldness of a conjecture which takes a real risk – the risk of being tested and refuted; the risk of clashing with reality. Thus my proposal was, and is, that it is this second boldness, together with the readiness to look out for tests and refutations, which distinguishes “empirical” science from nonscience, and especially from prescientific myths and metaphysics.” This passage makes it very clear, that


id: bold-hypothesis-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bold_hypothesis-2.md
category: reference
title: Bold hypothesis
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bold_hypothesis
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:44.231722+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: bold-hypothesis-20260505-0
summary:
Is boldness always a good thing in scientific hypothesizing? How we assess the degree of boldness may just be a subjective matter (it may depends on how you care to look at it). Some new ideas, although they are rather modest in themselves, can make a very large difference to the advancement of scientific research. At a more concrete level, the degree of "boldness" could refer (i) to the content of the hypothesis (considered relative to other possible hypotheses), or (ii) to the manner or context in which the hypothesis is presented, (iii) to its expected importance for research, or (iv) to the attitude involved. The degree of boldness could be downplayed for the sake of credibility or compatibility with established ideas, or it could be exaggerated to create the image of a "big scientific breakthrough" (to obtain research funding). The timing of the evaluation of a hypothesis is also important: a hypothesis which does not seem "bold" right now, could be judged "very bold" later, when historians know much more about the full impact it turned out to have (and vice versa). Alan F. Chalmers comments that “What rates as a bold conjecture at one stage in the history


id: bold-hypothesis-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bold_hypothesis-3.md
category: reference
title: Bold hypothesis
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bold_hypothesis
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:44.231722+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: bold-hypothesis-20260505-0
summary:
A falsified conjecture shows the scientist only "what he does not know" or what cannot be the case. However, in reality scientists are more interested in knowing what is the case, and what they can know. That is, scientists are interested mainly in gaining positive new knowledge, which can be used for practical purposes. Scientists are not primarily interested in “knowing that they don't know things”, or in "knowing what is not the case" (other than to rule out possibilities). Scientists want to know what really is the case. Scientific statements according to this Lakatosian perspective are not falsifiable statements, as Karl Popper claimed, but fallible statements. There is an important difference. Falsifiable ideas are testable ideas which can be definitely proved to be false. Fallible statements are testable statements that could be wrong. Fallible statements include both testable propositions and statements of which it is known that they could be wrong, although currently we do not know how to test them yet for their truth or falsity (or, the possible tests are technically not yet feasible). According to Lakatos, all scientific statements are in reality fallible hypotheses, which scientists at the very least intend or aim to test for


id: boundary-work-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary-work-0.md
category: reference
title: Boundary-work
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary-work
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:45.435606+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: boundary-work-20260505-0
summary:
Boundary-work is part of science studies. In boundary-work, boundaries, demarcations, or other divisions between fields of knowledge are created, advocated, attacked, or reinforced. Such delineations often have high stakes for the participants, and carry the implication that such boundaries are flexible and socially constructed. == Thomas F. Gieryn == The original use of the term "boundary-work" for these sorts of issues has been attributed to Thomas F. Gieryn, a sociologist, who initially used it to discuss the problem of demarcation, the philosophical difficulty of coming up with a rigorous delineation between what is "science" and what is "non-science". Gieryn defined boundary-work as the "attribution of selected characteristics to [an] institution of science (i.e., to its practitioners, methods, stock of knowledge, values and work organization) for purposes of constructing a social boundary that distinguishes some intellectual activities as [outside that boundary]." Gieryn suggests that Philosophers and sociologists of science, such as Karl Popper and Robert K. Merton, long struggled to come up with a criterion which would distinguish science as unique from other knowledge-generating activities, but never were able to come up with one that was stable, transhistorical, or worked reliably. Gieryn's 1983 article on boundary-work and demarcation highlighted that the


id: conquest-of-abundance-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_Abundance-0.md
category: reference
title: Conquest of Abundance
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_Abundance
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:46.746472+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: conquest-of-abundance-20260505-0
summary:
Conquest of Abundance: A Tale of Abstraction versus the Richness of Being is the last book by the Austrian philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend, published posthumously by the University of Chicago Press in 1999. It is edited by Bert Terpstra and includes a foreword from Grazia Borrini-Feyerabend, Feyerabend's 4th and final wife. The book was uncompleted due to Feyerabend's death in 1994 and was written to fulfill a promise made to Borrini-Feyerabend. The unfinished manuscript was published alongside several other previously published papers that engaged with the core themes of the book. == Translations == Conquest of Abundance has been translated into four languages: Spanish translation by Radamés Molina and César Mora: La conquista de la abundancia: La abstracción frente a la riqueza del ser, Paidós: Barcelona and Buenos Aires 2001, 336 pp. Italian translation by P. Adamo: Conquista dell'abbondanza: Storie dello scontro fra astrazione e ricchezza dell'essere, Raffaello Cortina: Milan 2002, 350 pp. German translation by Volker Böhnigk and Rainer Noske: Die Vernichitung der Vielfalt: Ein Bericht, Peter Engelmann (ed.), Passagen: Vienna 2005, 344 pp. Portuguese translation by Cecília Prada and Marcelo Rouanet: A Conquista da Abundância, Unisinos: São Leopoldo 2005. == Content == Conquest of Abundance contains two


id: consilience-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consilience-0.md
category: reference
title: Consilience
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consilience
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:48.342671+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: consilience-20260505-0
summary:
In science and history, consilience (also convergence of evidence or concordance of evidence) is the principle that evidence from independent, unrelated sources can "converge" on strong conclusions. That is, when multiple sources of evidence are in agreement, the conclusion can be very strong even when none of the individual sources of evidence is significantly so on its own. Most established scientific knowledge is supported by a convergence of evidence: if not, the evidence is comparatively weak, and there will probably not be a strong scientific consensus. The principle is based on unity of knowledge; measuring the same result by several different methods should lead to the same answer. For example, it should not matter whether one measures distances within the Giza pyramid complex by laser rangefinding, by satellite imaging, or with a metre-stick – in all three cases, the answer should be approximately the same. For the same reason, different dating methods in geochronology should concur, a result in chemistry should not contradict a result in geology, etc. The word consilience was originally coined as the phrase "consilience of inductions" by William Whewell (consilience refers to a "jumping together" of knowledge). The word comes from Latin com- "together" and -siliens


id: consilience-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consilience-1.md
category: reference
title: Consilience
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consilience
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:48.342671+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: consilience-20260505-0
summary:
== Deviations == Consilience does not forbid deviations: in fact, since not all experiments are perfect, some deviations from established knowledge are expected. However, when the convergence is strong enough, then new evidence inconsistent with the previous conclusion is not usually enough to outweigh that convergence. Without an equally strong convergence on the new result, the weight of evidence will still favor the established result. This means that the new evidence is most likely to be wrong. Science denialism (for example, AIDS denialism) is often based on a misunderstanding of this property of consilience. A denier may promote small gaps not yet accounted for by the consilient evidence, or small amounts of evidence contradicting a conclusion without accounting for the pre-existing strength resulting from consilience. More generally, to insist that all evidence converge precisely with no deviations would be naïve falsificationism, equivalent to considering a single contrary result to falsify a theory when another explanation, such as equipment malfunction or misinterpretation of results, is much more likely. == In history == Historical evidence also converges in an analogous way. For example: if five ancient historians, none of whom knew each other, all claim that Julius Caesar seized power in Rome


id: consilience-book-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consilience_(book)-0.md
category: reference
title: Consilience (book)
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consilience_(book)
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:49.498304+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: consilience-book-20260505-0
summary:
Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge is a 1998 book by the biologist E. O. Wilson, in which the author discusses methods that have been used to unite the sciences and might in the future unite them with the humanities. Wilson uses the term consilience to describe the synthesis of knowledge from different specialized fields of human endeavor. == Definition of consilience == This book defines consilience as "Literally a 'jumping together' of knowledge by the linking of facts and fact-based theory across disciplines to create a common groundwork of explanation." The word is borrowed from Whewell's phrase the consilience of inductions in his book Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences. Whewell posited that this consilience of inductions occurs when an induction obtained from one class of facts coincides with an induction obtained from a different class. In this way a consilience is a test of the truth of a theory. == Examples of consilience discussed by Wilson == === Chapter 1 The Ionian enchantment === The New Synthesis of Darwin's theory of evolution with genetics is an example of unification. The conviction that the world has a unified order and can be explained by natural laws, was dubbed by Gerald Holton


id: consilience-book-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consilience_(book)-1.md
category: reference
title: Consilience (book)
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consilience_(book)
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:49.498304+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: consilience-book-20260505-0
summary:
=== Chapter 7 From genes to culture === The relationship between genes and culture. Wilson posits that the basic element of culture is the meme. When a meme exists in a brain it has the form of a neuronal network that allows the meme to function within semantic memory. The link from genes to culture is that our genes shape our brains (in cooperation with the environment) and our brains allow us to work with memes as the basic units of culture. === Chapter 8 - 12 === The remaining chapters are titled Chapter 8 The fitness of human nature, Chapter 9 The social sciences, Chapter 10 The arts and their interpretation, Chapter 11 Ethics and religion, Chapter 12 To what end? == See also == Wendell Berry wrote a comprehensive critique of Consilience in his essay Life is a Miracle in his book with the same title. Philosophy of science The Two Cultures by C. P. Snow The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the Magister's Pox by Stephen Jay Gould == External links == Vogel Carey, Toni (2013). "Consilience. Toni Vogel Carey on discovering interconnections". philosophynow.org. Philosophy now. A magazine of ideas, issue 95. Retrieved 25 January 2022. Consilience' is


id: demarcation-problem-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarcation_problem-0.md
category: reference
title: Demarcation problem
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarcation_problem
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:50.682504+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: demarcation-problem-20260505-0
summary:
In philosophy of science and epistemology, the demarcation problem is the question of how to distinguish between science and non-science. It also examines the boundaries between science, pseudoscience and other products of human activity, like art and literature and beliefs. The debate continues after more than two millennia of dialogue among philosophers of science and scientists in various fields. The debate has consequences for what can be termed "scientific" in topics such as education and public policy. == The ancients == An early attempt at demarcation can be seen in the efforts of Greek natural philosophers and medical practitioners to distinguish their methods and their accounts of nature from the mythological or mystical accounts of their predecessors and contemporaries. Aristotle described at length what was involved in having scientific knowledge of something. To be scientific, he said, one must deal with causes, one must use logical demonstration, and one must identify the universals which 'inhere' in the particulars of sense. But above all, to have science one must have apodictic certainty. It is the last feature which, for Aristotle, most clearly distinguished the scientific way of knowing. G. E. R. Lloyd noted that there was a sense in which the


id: demarcation-problem-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarcation_problem-1.md
category: reference
title: Demarcation problem
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarcation_problem
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:50.682504+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: demarcation-problem-20260505-0
summary:
== Kuhnian postpositivism == Thomas Kuhn, an American historian and philosopher of science, is often associated with what has been termed postpositivism or postempiricism. In his 1962 book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn divided the process of doing science into two different endeavors, which he termed normal science and extraordinary science (sometimes known as "revolutionary science"), the latter of which introduces a new "paradigm" that solves new problems while continuing to provide solutions to the problems solved by the preceding paradigm. Finally, and this is for now my main point, a careful look at the scientific enterprise suggests that it is normal science, in which Sir Karl's sort of testing does not occur, rather than extraordinary science which most nearly distinguishes science from other enterprises. If a demarcation criterion exists (we must not, I think, seek a sharp or decisive one), it may lie just in that part of science which Sir Karl ignores. Kuhn's view of demarcation is most clearly expressed in his comparison of astronomy with astrology. Since antiquity, astronomy has been a puzzle-solving activity and therefore a science. If an astronomer's prediction failed, then this was a puzzle that he could hope to solve for instance


id: demarcation-problem-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarcation_problem-2.md
category: reference
title: Demarcation problem
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarcation_problem
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:50.682504+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: demarcation-problem-20260505-0
summary:
== Laudan == Larry Laudan concluded, after examining various historical attempts to establish a demarcation criterion, that "philosophy has failed to deliver the goods" in its attempts to distinguish science from non-science—to distinguish science from pseudoscience. None of the past attempts would be accepted by a majority of philosophers nor, in his opinion, should they be accepted by them or by anyone else. He stated that many well-founded beliefs are not scientific and, conversely, many scientific conjectures are not well-founded. He also stated that demarcation criteria were historically used as machines de guerre in polemical disputes between "scientists" and "pseudo-scientists". Advancing a number of examples from everyday practice of football and carpentry and non-scientific scholarship such as literary criticism and philosophy, he considered the question of whether a belief is well-founded or not to be more practically and philosophically significant than whether it is scientific or not. In his judgment, the demarcation between science and non-science was a pseudo-problem that would best be replaced by examining the distinction between reliable and unreliable knowledge, without bothering to ask whether that knowledge is scientific or not. He would consign phrases like "pseudo-science" or "unscientific" to the rhetoric of politicians or sociologists. ==


id: design-science-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_science-0.md
category: reference
title: Design science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:51.831112+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: design-science-20260505-0
summary:
Design science refers to a scientific, i.e. rational and systematic, approach to designing. An early concept of design science was introduced in 1957 by R. Buckminster Fuller who defined it as a systematic form of designing which he applied especially in innovative engineering design. The concept has been more broadly defined by the Design Science journal as “quantitative and qualitative research in the creation of artifacts and systems, and their embedding in our physical, virtual, psychological, economic, and social environment”. == Design-science relationship == There has been recurrent concern to differentiate design from science. Nigel Cross differentiated between scientific design, design science and a science of design. A science of design (the scientific study of design) does not require or assume that the acts of designing are themselves scientific, and an increasing number of research programs take this view. To some extent the two uses of the term design science (systematic designing and the study of designing) have co-mingled to the point where there can be some confusion, and design science sometimes may be referred to either as meaning a science of design or design as a science. == A science of design == Herbert A. Simon's The Sciences of


id: the-emperor-s-new-drugs-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor's_New_Drugs-0.md
category: reference
title: The Emperor's New Drugs
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor's_New_Drugs
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:55.763515+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-emperor-s-new-drugs-20260505-0
summary:
The Emperor's New Drugs: Exploding the Antidepressant Myth is a 2009 book by Irving Kirsch, arguing that the chemical imbalance theory of depression is wrong and that antidepressants have little or no direct effect on depression but, because of their common or serious side-effects, they are powerful active placebos. == Author == Kirsch is Associate Director of the Program in Placebo Studies and a lecturer in medicine at the Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, and professor emeritus of psychology at the Universities of Hull and Plymouth in the United Kingdom, and the University of Connecticut in the United States. His research interests include placebo effects, antidepressants, expectancy, and hypnosis. He is the originator of response expectancy theory. == Argument == While analyzing antidepressant trials as part of his research into the placebo effect, Kirsch realised that drug companies do not publish all of their disappointing antidepressant trial results, but most decisions about the efficacy of an antidepressant are based only on published results. Using the Freedom of Information Act, he and his colleagues acquired from the US Food and Drug Administration the unpublished trial results for six antidepressants. When the results from both published and unpublished


id: encyclop-die-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie-0.md
category: reference
title: Encyclopédie
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:57.015621+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: encyclop-die-20260505-0
summary:
The Encyclopédie, ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers (French for 'Encyclopedia, or a Systematic Dictionary of the Sciences, Arts and Crafts'), better known as the Encyclopédie (French: [ɑ̃siklɔpedi]), was a general encyclopedia published in France between 1751 and 1772, with later supplements, revised editions, an index, and translations. It had many contributors, known among contemporaries as the Encyclopédistes. It was edited by Denis Diderot and, until 1759, co-edited by Jean le Rond d'Alembert. The Encyclopédie is most famous for representing the thought of the Enlightenment. According to Diderot in the article "Encyclopédie", the Encyclopédie's aim was "to change the way people think" and to allow people to inform themselves. Diderot hoped the Encyclopédie would disseminate a vast amount of knowledge to the present and future generations. Thus, it is an example of democratization of knowledge, though the high price of the first edition especially (980 livres) prevented it from being bought by much of the middle class. The Encyclopédie was also the first encyclopedia to include contributions from many named contributors, and it was the first general encyclopedia to describe the mechanical arts in much detail. In the first edition, seventeen folio volumes of text were


id: encyclop-die-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie-1.md
category: reference
title: Encyclopédie
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:57.015621+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: encyclop-die-20260505-0
summary:
The work consisted of 28 volumes, with approximately 71,818 articles and 2,784 plates of illustrations (the exact numbers depend on one's definition of an "article" and a "plate"). The first seventeen volumes were published between 1751 and 1765; eleven volumes of plates were finished by 1772. The first edition had a pressrun of 4,225 copies, well above the average pressrun for French books at the time, which was around 2000 copies., and it earned the four publishers profits of more than two million livres. Because of its sometimes radical contents, the Encyclopédie stirred up controversy in conservative circles, and after the publication of the second volume, it was briefly suspended by a royal edict of 1752 accusing it of "destroying royal authority, fomenting a spirit of independence and revolt, and ... laying the groundwork for error, for the corruption of morals, and for irreligion and atheism." In 1759, following the publication of the seventh volume, on the initiative of the Parlement of Paris, the French government suspended the encyclopedia's privilege. Nevertheless, work continued "in secret," partially because the project had highly placed supporters, including the minister Malesherbes and the royal mistress Madame de Pompadour. French authorities deliberately ignored the continuation


id: encyclop-die-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie-2.md
category: reference
title: Encyclopédie
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:57.015621+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: encyclop-die-20260505-0
summary:
From almost the beginning of the publication of volume i in June 1751, many contemporaries took to calling the collaborators by the term "Encyclopedists" and assumed that they were a cohesive group of religious and political reformers in close-knit association.... But, as we shall see, the Encyclopedists were not a company of obedient soldiers led by a few generals in a campaign to destroy the Old Regime. They were instead a varied collection of men of letters, physicians, scientists, craftsmen, scholars, and others, each frequently following his own bent with little central direction. The Encyclopédie became not a party statement, but a great compendium of knowledge filled with contradictions, a mélange of ideas, some progressive and some conservative. The Encyclopédie was the first encyclopedia to credit contributors within articles in a systematic way. This it accomplished for regular contributors by appending symbols (sometimes called "signatures") at the ends of articles. An "O" at the end of an article indicated D'Alembert as responsible, for example, just as an "L" did the anatomist Pierre Tarin. The symbols were set forth in the "Preliminary Discourse." From the beginning, however, some articles were anonymous, whether because of oversight or because no one dared to


id: encyclop-die-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie-3.md
category: reference
title: Encyclopédie
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:57.015621+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: encyclop-die-20260505-0
summary:
=== Structure === The introduction to the Encyclopédie, D'Alembert's "Preliminary Discourse", is considered an important exposition of Enlightenment ideals. Among other things, it presents a taxonomy of human knowledge (see Fig. 3). The idea of presenting a taxonomy of knowledge in the introduction to an alphabetical encyclopedia arose with the Cyclopaedia. More specific inspiration for the one in the Encyclopédie came from Francis Bacon's The Advancement of Learning. The three main branches of knowledge were: "Memory"/History, "Reason"/Philosophy, and "Imagination"/Poetry. In this taxonomy and elsewhere, D'Alembert's "Preliminary Discourse" made human reason, and not religious or other authority, the measure of knowledge. According to the “Preliminary Discourse,” the purpose of the tree of knowledge was to allow users of the Encyclopédie to relate articles they consulted to the entirety of knowledge. Accordingly, the first article in the Encyclopédie, on the letter “A,” began, following the headword, with a parenthetical indication of its place in the tree of knowledge. Notice the abbreviations in italics, which correspond to levels in the tree of knowledge: A, a & a s.m. (ordre Encyclopéd. Entend. Science de l'homme, Logique, Art de communiquer, Gramm.) caractere ou figure de la premiere lettre de l'Alphabet, en latin, en françois, &


id: encyclop-die-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie-4.md
category: reference
title: Encyclopédie
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:57.015621+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: encyclop-die-20260505-0
summary:
=== Overall scope === The Encyclopédie was narrower in scope than nineteenth- and twentieth-century encyclopedias (which covered history lavishly), and much narrower in scope than Wikipedia (which also covers popular culture lavishly). Like the Cyclopaedia, its model, it was a dictionary of the arts and sciences – or, rather, to quote its subtitle, a dictionary of the sciences, arts, and crafts. In contemporary parlance, dictionaries of the arts and sciences were often contrasted with historical dictionaries, the former concentrating on areas of knowledge that could be understood as rational systems, the latter concentrating on contingent facts. Dictionaries of the arts and sciences had been encroaching on historical knowledge since their beginnings in the late seventeenth century, and the process continued with the Encyclopédie, which covered geography more thoroughly than the Cyclopaedia or any previous dictionary of the arts and sciences. It covered history only patchily, however, and the omission reflected not simply an oversight but a conviction that historical knowledge belonged in a different kind of work. In the article 'Encyclopédie', Diderot wrote that “the purpose of an encyclopedia is to bring together knowledge scattered across the surface of the earth.” At the beginning of the work, neither Diderot nor


id: encyclop-die-20260505-5
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie-5.md
category: reference
title: Encyclopédie
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:57.015621+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: encyclop-die-20260505-0
summary:
== Influence == By 1789, in its various editions, some 25,000 sets of the Encyclopédie had been sold throughout Europe. Chambers' (and then Abraham Rees's) much smaller Cyclopaedia went through more editions (including translations) and presumably sold in more sets, since at least one of the pressruns was as high as those of the Encyclopédie. Still, the third edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, which was almost as large as the Encyclopédie, sold 13,000 sets, half as many as the Encyclopédie, and the only eighteenth-century encyclopedia that was bigger than the Encyclopédie, the Grosses vollständiges Universal-Lexicon (1732–50), seems to have sold only 1,500 sets. Unlike the Cyclopaedia, the Encyclopédie was never published in a comprehensive translation, though attempts at such a translation were made in English and German. In part, French, unlike Chambers’ English, was understood by elites throughout Europe and elsewhere. More importantly, extracts were published in several languages, including the "Preliminary Discourse." In Russian, at least twenty-nine works were published between 1767 and 1805 based on articles from the Encyclopédie. In the history of encyclopedias, the Encyclopédie was significant in several respects. It was the first encyclopedia known to have been written by numerous contributors, and it pioneered the


id: encyclop-die-20260505-6
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie-6.md
category: reference
title: Encyclopédie
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:57.015621+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: encyclop-die-20260505-0
summary:
=== Bibliography === Blom, Philipp. Enlightening the World: Encyclopédie, the Book that changed the Course of History. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. ISBN 1-4039-6895-0. Birn, Raymond. "Encyclopedie." In Encyclopedia of the Enlightenment. Ed. Alan Charles Kors. 4 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2003. 1: 403-409. Birn, Raymond. “Les Mots et les images: L’Encyclopédie, le projet de Diderot et la stratégie des éditeurs.” Revue d'histoire moderne et contemporaine 35 (1988): 637-51. Boussuge, Emmanuel. "La chronologie de l'Encyclopédie interdite: Les dix derniers volumes: Tomes VIII a XVII (1762-1765)." Dix-huitième siècle 52 (2020): 287-302. Bradshaw, Lael Ely. “Ephraim Chambers’ Cyclopaedia.” In Notable Encyclopedias of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Ed. Frank A. Kafker. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation: 1981. 123-40. Brewer, Daniel (1993). The Discourse of Enlightenment in Eighteenth-century France: Diderot and the Art of Philosophizing. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521414838.. Brewer, Daniel. "The Encyclopédie: Innovation and Legacy." In New Essays on Diderot. Ed. James Fowler, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. ISBN 0-521-76956-6. Chinard, Gilbert. "L'Encyclopédie et le rayonnement de l'esprit encyclopédique en Amérique." Cahiers de l'AIEF 1-2 (1951): 3-22. Curran, Andrew S. The Anatomy of Blackness: Science & Slavery in an Age of Enlightenment. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2011. Curran, Andrew


id: encyclop-die-20260505-7
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie-7.md
category: reference
title: Encyclopédie
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopédie
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:57.015621+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: encyclop-die-20260505-0
summary:
== Further reading == D'Alembert, Jean Le Rond. Preliminary discourse to the Encyclopedia of Diderot, translated by Richard N. Schwab, 1995. ISBN 0-226-13476-8 Darnton, Robert. "The Encyclopédie Wars of Prerevolutionary France." American Historical Review 78 (1973): 1331–52. online ENCICLOPEDIA DEGLI ILLUMINISTI - Antologia tecnica e scientifica (in Italian language), edited by Claudio Pierini, Cierre Grafica, Verona 2022. ISBN 978-883-210-2635 Encyclopédie ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers, Editions Flammarion, 1993. ISBN 2-08-070426-5 Grimsley. Ronald. Jean d'Alembert (1963) Hazard, Paul. European thought in the Eighteenth Century from Montesquieu to Lessing (1954). pp. 199–224 Lough, John. Essays on the Encyclopédie of Diderot and d'Alembert. Oxford UP, 1968. Pannabecker, John R. Diderot, the Mechanical Arts, and the Encyclopédie, 1994. == External links == Media related to Encyclopédie, ou Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers at Wikimedia Commons Texts on Wikisource: "Encyclopédie". New International Encyclopedia. 1905. "Encyclopédie". The Nuttall Encyclopædia. 1907. French Wikisource has original text related to this article: Encyclopédie, ou Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers Digitized version of the Encyclopédie Diderot – search engine in tribute to Diderot University of Chicago on-line version with an English interface and the dates of publication


id: expertise-finding-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expertise_finding-0.md
category: reference
title: Expertise finding
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expertise_finding
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:58.254989+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: expertise-finding-20260505-0
summary:
Expertise finding is the use of tools for finding and assessing individual expertise. In the recruitment industry, expertise finding is the problem of searching for employable candidates with certain required skills set. In other words, it is the challenge of linking humans to expertise areas, and as such is a sub-problem of expertise retrieval (the other problem being expertise profiling). == Importance of expertise == It can be argued that human expertise is more valuable than capital, means of production or intellectual property. Contrary to expertise, all other aspects of capitalism are now relatively generic: access to capital is global, as is access to means of production for many areas of manufacturing. Intellectual property can be similarly licensed. Furthermore, expertise finding is also a key aspect of institutional memory, as without its experts an institution is effectively decapitated. However, finding and "licensing" expertise, the key to the effective use of these resources, remain much harder, starting with the very first step: finding expertise that you can trust. Until very recently, finding expertise required a mix of individual, social and collaborative practices, a haphazard process at best. Mostly, it involved contacting individuals one trusts and asking them for referrals, while hoping


id: expertise-finding-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expertise_finding-1.md
category: reference
title: Expertise finding
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expertise_finding
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:58.254989+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: expertise-finding-20260505-0
summary:
== Approaches for creating expertise content == Manual, either by experts themselves (e.g., Skillhive) or by a curator (Expertise Finder) Automated, e.g., using software agents (e.g., MIT's ExpertFinder) or a combination of agents and human curation (e.g., ResearchScorecard ) In industrial expertise search engines (e.g., LinkedIn), there are many signals coming into the ranking functions, such as, user-generated content (e.g., profiles), community-generated content (e.g., recommendations and skills endorsements) and personalized signals (e.g., social connections). Moreover, user queries might contain many other aspects rather required expertise, such as, locations, industries or companies. Thus, traditional information retrieval features like text matching are also important. Learning to rank is typically used to combine all of these signals together into a ranking function == Collaborator discovery == In academia, a related problem is collaborator discovery, where the goal is to suggest suitable collaborators to a researcher. While expertise finding is an asynchronous problem (employer looking for employee), collaborator discovery can be distinguished from expertise finding by helping establishing more symmetric relationships (collaborations). Also, while in expertise finding the task often can be clearly characterized, this is not the case in academic research, where future goals are more fuzzy. == References == == Further reading


id: farewell-to-reason-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farewell_to_Reason-0.md
category: reference
title: Farewell to Reason
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farewell_to_Reason
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:07:59.479045+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: farewell-to-reason-20260505-0
summary:
Farewell to Reason is a 1987 book by the Austrian philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend. The book includes some reprinted essays published in other venues and was published by Verso Books, which also published Against Method and Science in a Free Society. The primary goal of the book is to trace the historical origins of "rationalism" and argue for a version of relativism and cultural diversity. == Translations == Farewell to Reason has been translated into numerous languages: Spanish translation by José R. de Rivera: Adios a la razón, Tecnos: Madrid 1984, 300 pp. French translation by Baudouin Jurdant: Adieu à la raison, Seuil: Paris 1989, 373 pp. German translation by Jürgen Blasius: Irrwege der Vernunft, Suhrkamp: Frankfurt am Main 1989, 471 pp. Reprinted 1990. Italian translation by Marcello D'Agostino: Addio alla ragione, Armando: Roma 1990, 320 pp. Japanese translation: Risei yo saraba, Hoseidaigakushuppankyoku: Tokyo 1992, 34+399 pp. Portuguese translation: Adeus à razão, UNESP: São Paulo 2010, 399 pp. The book was reprinted in 1988, 1990, 1993, 1994, 1996, and 1999. A 2nd edition was released including a new preface by Feyerabend. == Content == Farewell to Reason begins with a lengthy chapter on relativism. He distinguishes it from absolutism,


id: funding-bias-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_bias-0.md
category: reference
title: Funding bias
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_bias
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:02.199354+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: funding-bias-20260505-0
summary:
Funding bias, also known as sponsorship bias, funding outcome bias, funding publication bias, and funding effect, is a tendency of a scientific study to support the interests of the study's financial sponsor. This phenomenon is recognized sufficiently that researchers undertake studies to examine bias in past published studies. Funding bias has been associated, in particular, with research into chemical toxicity, tobacco, and pharmaceutical drugs. It is an instance of experimenter's bias. == Causes == === Human nature === The psychology text Influence: Science and Practice describes the act of reciprocity as a trait in which a person feels obliged to return favors. This trait is embodied in all human cultures. Human nature may influence even the most ethical researchers to be affected by their sponsors, although they may genuinely deny it. === Misconduct === Scientific malpractice involving shoddy research or data manipulation does occur in rare instances. Often, however, the quality of manufacturers' studies are at least as good as studies that were not funded by a special interest. Therefore, bias usually occurs for other reasons. === Predetermined conclusion === Research results can be selected or discarded to support a predetermined conclusion. The tobacco industry, for example, would publish their


id: beno-t-godin-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benoît_Godin-0.md
category: reference
title: Benoît Godin
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benoît_Godin
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:03.923772+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: beno-t-godin-20260505-0
summary:
Benoît Godin was a Canadian political scientist and sociologist. == Biography == Benoît Godin is mostly known for his research into the history of statistics, statistics of innovation, and of the ideological roots of the concept of innovation. After a first degree at the Université Laval (1984) in Québec (CA), he obtained a PhD at the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU) the University of Sussex (UK) in 1994). From February 1993 until his death he was professor at Institut national de la recherche scientifique INRS, Québec (CA). == Work == The work of Benoît Godin covers both the history of quantification and that of innovation. He worked on measurement statistics in science, on the history of science proper, as well as that of technology and innovation. In the last years of his life he focused on the intellectual history of innovation, noting how the ‘superlative’ connotation of the term innovation is recent, in relative terms, as it had a rather negative connotation until the late 1960s or early 1970s. == Books == Godin, Benoit (2020). The idea of technological innovation : a brief alternative history. Edward Elgar Publishing. Cheltenham. ISBN 978-1-83910-400-8. OCLC 1152021488.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)


id: higher-superstition-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_Superstition-0.md
category: reference
title: Higher Superstition
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_Superstition
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:05.127941+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: higher-superstition-20260505-0
summary:
Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science is a 1994 book about the philosophy of science by the biologist Paul R. Gross and the mathematician Norman Levitt. == Summary == Levitt states he is a leftist trying to save the "academic left" from itself by exposing misuses and abuses of science to advance political goals. Topics discussed include: cultural constructivism or social constructivism, the strong programme, the science criticism of Stanley Aronowitz and Bruno Latour, post-modernism and deconstructionism and their influence on American academia, the science criticism of Andrew Ross, feminist science criticism, environmentalist science criticism and "apocalyptic naturism", Jeremy Rifkin's influential "pseudoscientific alarmism", attacks on medical research connected with AIDS activism and animal rights advocacy, and Afrocentrism. The book also questions human activity's relationship with climate change. The authors find it unfortunate that social scientists and literary critics often consider themselves qualified to criticize the natural sciences without learning much about them in detail, and worry about what would replace Enlightenment ideals of universalism and rationalism, and objective truths about the natural world as ascertained by a scientific methodology of repeatable experiments, if these were to be discredited, as many science critics in the humanities wish


id: history-of-scholarship-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_scholarship-0.md
category: reference
title: History of scholarship
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_scholarship
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:06.382205+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-scholarship-20260505-0
summary:
The history of scholarship is the historical study of fields of study which are not covered by the English term "science" (cf., history of science), but are covered by, for example, the German term "Wissenschaft" (i.e., all kinds of academic studies). Examples include the history of classical studies, philosophy, religion, biblical studies, historiography, music, art, and literature. It is a field which has recently undergone a complete renewal and is now a major branch of research. In 2015, the Society for the History of the Humanities was established, coinciding with the launch of the journal History of Humanities in 2016. Both developments reflect the field’s growing institutional presence and international scholarly collaboration. == Classical scholarship == Rudolph Pfeiffer (1968) describes the history of classical scholarship from its revival inspired by Petrarch to the achievements of the Italian humanists and the independent movement in Holland (including Erasmus) and the German scholar-reformers. Pfeiffer traces the development of classical scholarship in the countries of Western Europe through the next two centuries, with particular attention to sixteenth-century France and eighteenth-century England. Finally he provides an account of the new approach made by Winckelmann and his successors in Germany. == Philosophers, scholars, polymaths, and scientists


id: history-of-science-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-0.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
The history of science covers the development of science from ancient times to the present. It encompasses all three major branches of science: natural, social, and formal. Protoscience, early sciences, and natural philosophies such as alchemy and astrology that existed during the Bronze Age, Iron Age, classical antiquity and the Middle Ages, declined after the emergence of modern sciences during the Scientific Revolution. The earliest roots of scientific thinking and practice can be traced to Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia during the 3rd and 2nd millennia BCE. These civilizations' contributions to mathematics, astronomy, and medicine influenced later Greek natural philosophy of classical antiquity, wherein formal attempts were made to provide explanations of events in the physical world based on natural causes. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire, knowledge of Greek conceptions of the world deteriorated in Latin-speaking Western Europe during the early centuries (400 to 1000 CE) of the Middle Ages, but continued to thrive in the Greek-speaking Byzantine Empire. Aided by translations of Greek texts, the Hellenistic worldview was preserved and absorbed into the Arabic-speaking Muslim world during the Islamic Golden Age. The recovery and assimilation of Greek works and Islamic inquiries into Western Europe from the 10th


id: history-of-science-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-1.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
In prehistoric times, knowledge and technique were passed from generation to generation in an oral tradition. For instance, the domestication of maize for agriculture has been dated to about 9,000 years ago in southern Mexico, before the development of writing systems. Similarly, archaeological evidence indicates the development of astronomical knowledge in preliterate societies. The oral tradition of preliterate societies had several features, the first of which was its fluidity. New information was constantly absorbed and adjusted to new circumstances or community needs. There were no archives or reports. This fluidity was closely related to the practical need to explain and justify a present state of affairs. Another feature was the tendency to describe the universe as just sky and earth, with a potential underworld. They were also prone to identify causes with beginnings, thereby providing a historical origin with an explanation. There was also a reliance on a "medicine man" or "wise woman" for healing, knowledge of divine or demonic causes of diseases, and in more extreme cases, for rituals such as exorcism, divination, songs, and incantations. Finally, there was an inclination to unquestioningly accept explanations that might be deemed implausible in more modern times while at the same time


id: history-of-science-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-2.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
The ancient Mesopotamians had extensive knowledge about the chemical properties of clay, sand, metal ore, bitumen, stone, and other natural materials, and applied this knowledge to practical use in manufacturing pottery, faience, glass, soap, metals, lime plaster, and waterproofing. Metallurgy required knowledge about the properties of metals. Nonetheless, the Mesopotamians seem to have had little interest in gathering information about the natural world for the mere sake of gathering information and were far more interested in studying the manner in which the gods had ordered the universe. Biology of non-human organisms was generally only written about in the context of mainstream academic disciplines. Animal physiology was studied extensively for the purpose of divination; the anatomy of the liver, which was seen as an important organ in haruspicy, was studied in particularly intensive detail. Animal behavior was also studied for divinatory purposes. Most information about the training and domestication of animals was probably transmitted orally without being written down, but one text dealing with the training of horses has survived. ==== Mesopotamian medicine ==== The ancient Mesopotamians had no distinction between "rational science" and magic. When a person became ill, doctors prescribed magical formulas to be recited as well as medicinal


id: history-of-science-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-3.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
The earliest traces of mathematical knowledge in the Indian subcontinent appear with the Indus Valley Civilisation (c. 3300 – c. 1300 BCE). The people of this civilization made bricks whose dimensions were in the proportion 4:2:1, which is favorable for the stability of a brick structure. They also tried to standardize measurement of length to a high degree of accuracy. They designed a ruler—the Mohenjo-daro ruler—whose length of approximately 1.32 in (34 mm) was divided into ten equal parts. Bricks manufactured in ancient Mohenjo-daro often had dimensions that were integral multiples of this unit of length. The Bakhshali manuscript contains problems involving arithmetic, algebra and geometry, including mensuration. The topics covered include fractions, square roots, arithmetic and geometric progressions, solutions of simple equations, simultaneous linear equations, quadratic equations and indeterminate equations of the second degree. In the 3rd century BCE, Pingala presents the Pingala-sutras, the earliest known treatise on Sanskrit prosody. He also presents a numerical system by adding one to the sum of place values. Pingala's work also includes material related to the Fibonacci numbers, called mātrāmeru. Indian astronomer and mathematician Aryabhata (476–550), in his Aryabhatiya (499) introduced the sine function in trigonometry and the number 0. In 628,


id: history-of-science-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-4.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
==== Logic ==== The development of Indian logic dates back to the Chandahsutra of Pingala and anviksiki of Medhatithi Gautama (c. 6th century BCE); the Sanskrit grammar rules of Pāṇini (c. 5th century BCE); the Vaisheshika school's analysis of atomism (c. 6th century BCE to 2nd century BCE); the analysis of inference by Gotama (c. 6th century BCE to 2nd century CE), founder of the Nyaya school of Hindu philosophy; and the tetralemma of Nagarjuna (c. 2nd century CE). Indian logic stands as one of the three original traditions of logic, alongside the Greek and the Chinese logic. The Indian tradition continued to develop through early to modern times, in the form of the Navya-Nyāya school of logic. In the 2nd century, the Buddhist philosopher Nagarjuna refined the Catuskoti form of logic. The Catuskoti is also often glossed Tetralemma (Greek) which is the name for a largely comparable, but not equatable, 'four corner argument' within the tradition of Classical logic. Navya-Nyāya developed a sophisticated language and conceptual scheme that allowed it to raise, analyse, and solve problems in logic and epistemology. It systematised all the Nyāya concepts into four main categories: sense or perception (pratyakşa), inference (anumāna), comparison or similarity


id: history-of-science-20260505-5
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-5.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
To better prepare for calamities, Zhang Heng invented a seismometer in 132 CE which provided instant alert to authorities in the capital Luoyang that an earthquake had occurred in a location indicated by a specific cardinal or ordinal direction. Although no tremors could be felt in the capital when Zhang told the court that an earthquake had just occurred in the northwest, a message came soon afterwards that an earthquake had indeed struck 400 to 500 km (250 to 310 mi) northwest of Luoyang (in what is now modern Gansu). Zhang called his device the 'instrument for measuring the seasonal winds and the movements of the Earth' (Houfeng didong yi 候风地动仪), so-named because he and others thought that earthquakes were most likely caused by the enormous compression of trapped air. There are many notable contributors to early Chinese disciplines, inventions, and practices throughout the ages. One of the best examples would be the medieval Song Chinese Shen Kuo (1031–1095), a polymath and statesman who was the first to describe the magnetic-needle compass used for navigation, discovered the concept of true north, improved the design of the astronomical gnomon, armillary sphere, sight tube, and clepsydra, and described the use of drydocks


id: history-of-science-20260505-6
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-6.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
=== Pre-socratics === The earliest Greek philosophers, known as the pre-Socratics, provided competing answers to the question found in the myths of their neighbors: "How did the ordered cosmos in which we live come to be?" The pre-Socratic philosopher Thales (640–546 BCE) of Miletus, identified by later authors such as Aristotle as the first of the Ionian philosophers, postulated non-supernatural explanations for natural phenomena. For example, that land floats on water and that earthquakes are caused by the agitation of the water upon which the land floats, rather than the god Poseidon. Thales' student Pythagoras of Samos founded the Pythagorean school, which investigated mathematics for its own sake, and was the first to postulate that the Earth is spherical in shape. Leucippus (5th century BCE) introduced atomism, the theory that all matter is made of indivisible, imperishable units called atoms. This was greatly expanded on by his pupil Democritus and later Epicurus. === Plato and Aristotle === Plato and Aristotle produced the first systematic discussions of natural philosophy, which did much to shape later investigations of nature. Their development of deductive reasoning was of particular importance and usefulness to later scientific inquiry. Plato founded the Platonic Academy in 387 BCE,


id: history-of-science-20260505-7
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-7.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
=== Hellenistic medicine === There was not a defined societal structure for healthcare during the age of Hippocrates. At that time, society was not organized and knowledgeable as people still relied on pure religious reasoning to explain illnesses. Hippocrates introduced the first healthcare system based on science and clinical protocols. Hippocrates' theories about physics and medicine helped pave the way in creating an organized medical structure for society. In medicine, Hippocrates (c. 460–370 BCE) and his followers were the first to describe many diseases and medical conditions and developed the Hippocratic Oath for physicians, still relevant and in use today. Hippocrates' ideas are expressed in The Hippocratic Corpus. The collection notes descriptions of medical philosophies and how disease and lifestyle choices reflect on the physical body. Hippocrates influenced a Westernized, professional relationship among physician and patient. Hippocrates is also known as "the Father of Medicine". Herophilos (335–280 BCE) was the first to base his conclusions on dissection of the human body and to describe the nervous system. Galen (129 – c. 200 CE) performed many audacious operations—including brain and eye surgeries— that were not tried again for almost two millennia. === Greek mathematics === In Hellenistic Egypt, the mathematician Euclid


id: history-of-science-20260505-8
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-8.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
=== Greek scholarship under Roman rule === During the rule of Rome, famous historians such as Polybius, Livy and Plutarch documented the rise of the Roman Republic, and the organization and histories of other nations, while statesmen like Julius Caesar, Cicero, and others provided examples of the politics of the republic and Rome's empire and wars. The study of politics during this age was oriented toward understanding history, understanding methods of governing, and describing the operation of governments. The Roman conquest of Greece did not diminish learning and culture in the Greek provinces. On the contrary, the appreciation of Greek achievements in literature, philosophy, politics, and the arts by Rome's upper class coincided with the increased prosperity of the Roman Empire. Greek settlements had existed in Italy for centuries and the ability to read and speak Greek was not uncommon in Italian cities such as Rome. Moreover, the settlement of Greek scholars in Rome, whether voluntarily or as slaves, gave Romans access to teachers of Greek literature and philosophy. Conversely, young Roman scholars also studied abroad in Greece and upon their return to Rome, were able to convey Greek achievements to their Latin leadership. And despite the translation of a


id: history-of-science-20260505-9
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-9.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
==== Preservation of Greek heritage ==== The fall of the Western Roman Empire led to a deterioration of the classical tradition in the western part (or Latin West) of Europe during the 5th century. In contrast, the Byzantine Empire resisted the barbarian attacks and preserved and improved the learning. While the Byzantine Empire still held learning centers such as Constantinople, Alexandria and Antioch, Western Europe's knowledge was concentrated in monasteries until the development of medieval universities in the 12th centuries. The curriculum of monastic schools included the study of the few available ancient texts and of new works on practical subjects like medicine and timekeeping. In the sixth century in the Byzantine Empire, Isidore of Miletus compiled Archimedes' mathematical works in the Archimedes Palimpsest, where all Archimedes' mathematical contributions were collected and studied. John Philoponus, another Byzantine scholar, was the first to question Aristotle's teaching of physics, introducing the theory of impetus. The theory of impetus was an auxiliary or secondary theory of Aristotelian dynamics, put forth initially to explain projectile motion against gravity. It is the intellectual precursor to the concepts of inertia, momentum and acceleration in classical mechanics. The works of John Philoponus inspired Galileo Galilei ten centuries


id: history-of-science-20260505-10
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-10.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
==== Advancements in mathematics ==== Most of the achievements by Islamic scholars during this period were in mathematics. Arabic mathematics was a direct descendant of Greek and Indian mathematics. For instance, what is now known as Arabic numerals originally came from India, but Muslim mathematicians made several key refinements to the number system, such as the introduction of decimal point notation. Mathematicians such as Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi (c. 780–850) gave his name to the concept of the algorithm, while the term algebra is derived from al-jabr, the beginning of the title of one of his publications. Islamic trigonometry continued from the works of Ptolemy's Almagest and Indian Siddhanta, from which they added trigonometric functions, drew up tables, and applied trigonometry to spheres and planes. Many of their engineers, instruments makers, and surveyors contributed books in applied mathematics. It was in astronomy where Islamic mathematicians made their greatest contributions. Al-Battani (c. 858–929) improved the measurements of Hipparchus, preserved in the translation of Ptolemy's Hè Megalè Syntaxis (The great treatise) translated as Almagest. Al-Battani also improved the precision of the measurement of the precession of the Earth's axis. Corrections were made to Ptolemy's geocentric model by al-Battani, Ibn al-Haytham, Averroes and


id: history-of-science-20260505-11
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-11.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
==== Medieval universities ==== An intellectual revitalization of Western Europe started with the birth of medieval universities in the 12th century. These urban institutions grew from the informal scholarly activities of learned friars who visited monasteries, consulted libraries, and conversed with other fellow scholars. A friar who became well-known would attract a following of disciples, giving rise to a brotherhood of scholars (or collegium in Latin). A collegium might travel to a town or request a monastery to host them. However, if the number of scholars within a collegium grew too large, they would opt to settle in a town instead. As the number of collegia within a town grew, the collegia might request that their king grant them a charter that would convert them into a universitas. Many universities were chartered during this period, with the first in Bologna in 1088, followed by Paris in 1150, Oxford in 1167, and Cambridge in 1231. The granting of a charter meant that the medieval universities were partially sovereign and independent from local authorities. Their independence allowed them to conduct themselves and judge their own members based on their own rules. Furthermore, as initially religious institutions, their faculties and students were protected


id: history-of-science-20260505-12
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-12.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
==== Medieval science ==== The first half of the 14th century saw much important scientific work, largely within the framework of scholastic commentaries on Aristotle's scientific writings. William of Ockham emphasized the principle of parsimony: natural philosophers should not postulate unnecessary entities, so that motion is not a distinct thing but is only the moving object and an intermediary "sensible species" is not needed to transmit an image of an object to the eye. Scholars such as Jean Buridan and Nicole Oresme started to reinterpret elements of Aristotle's mechanics. In particular, Buridan developed the theory that impetus was the cause of the motion of projectiles, which was a first step towards the modern concept of inertia. The Oxford Calculators began to mathematically analyze the kinematics of motion, making this analysis without considering the causes of motion. In 1348, the Black Death and other disasters sealed a sudden end to philosophic and scientific development. == Renaissance == === Printing and discovery === The introduction and rapid spread of the movable type printing press during the 2nd half of the 15th century ended the manuscript culture of the Middle Ages, where facts were few and far between, and replaced it with a


id: history-of-science-20260505-13
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-13.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
=== Scientific societies and journals === A critical innovation was the creation of permanent scientific societies and their scholarly journals, which dramatically sped the diffusion of new ideas. Typical was the founding of the Royal Society in London in 1660 and its journal in 1665 the Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society, the first scientific journal in English. 1665 also saw the first journal in French, the Journal des sçavans. Science drawing on the works of Newton, Descartes, Pascal and Leibniz, science was on a path to modern mathematics, physics and technology by the time of the generation of Benjamin Franklin (1706–1790), Leonhard Euler (1707–1783), Mikhail Lomonosov (1711–1765) and Jean le Rond d'Alembert (1717–1783). Denis Diderot's Encyclopédie, published between 1751 and 1772 brought this new understanding to a wider audience. The impact of this process was not limited to science and technology, but affected philosophy (Immanuel Kant, David Hume), religion (the increasingly significant impact of science upon religion), and society and politics in general (Adam Smith, Voltaire). === Developments in geology === Geology did not undergo systematic restructuring during the Scientific Revolution but instead existed as a cloud of isolated, disconnected ideas about rocks, minerals, and landforms long before it


id: history-of-science-20260505-14
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-14.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
=== Developments in mathematics === In mathematics, the notion of complex numbers finally matured and led to a subsequent analytical theory; they also began the use of hypercomplex numbers. Karl Weierstrass and others carried out the arithmetization of analysis for functions of real and complex variables. It also saw rise to new progress in geometry beyond those classical theories of Euclid, after a period of nearly two thousand years. The mathematical science of logic likewise had revolutionary breakthroughs after a similarly long period of stagnation. But the most important step in science at this time were the ideas formulated by the creators of electrical science. Their work changed the face of physics and made possible for new technology to come about such as electric power, electrical telegraphy, the telephone, and radio. === Developments in chemistry === In chemistry, Dmitri Mendeleev, following the atomic theory of John Dalton, created the first periodic table of elements. Other highlights include the discoveries unveiling the nature of atomic structure and matter, simultaneously with chemistry – and of new kinds of radiation. The theory that all matter is made of atoms, which are the smallest constituents of matter that cannot be broken down without losing


id: history-of-science-20260505-15
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-15.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
=== Founding of psychology === Psychology as a scientific enterprise that was independent from philosophy began in 1879 when Wilhelm Wundt founded the first laboratory dedicated exclusively to psychological research (in Leipzig). Other important early contributors to the field include Hermann Ebbinghaus (a pioneer in memory studies), Ivan Pavlov (who discovered classical conditioning), William James, and Sigmund Freud. Freud's influence has been enormous, though more as cultural icon than a force in scientific psychology. === Modern sociology === Modern sociology emerged in the early 19th century as the academic response to the modernization of the world. Among many early sociologists (e.g., Émile Durkheim), the aim of sociology was in structuralism, understanding the cohesion of social groups, and developing an "antidote" to social disintegration. Max Weber was concerned with the modernization of society through the concept of rationalization, which he believed would trap individuals in an "iron cage" of rational thought. Some sociologists, including Georg Simmel and W. E. B. Du Bois, used more microsociological, qualitative analyses. This microlevel approach played an important role in American sociology, with the theories of George Herbert Mead and his student Herbert Blumer resulting in the creation of the symbolic interactionism approach to sociology. In


id: history-of-science-20260505-16
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-16.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
In the early 20th century, the study of heredity became a major investigation after the rediscovery in 1900 of the laws of inheritance developed by Mendel. The 20th century also saw the integration of physics and chemistry, with chemical properties explained as the result of the electronic structure of the atom. Linus Pauling's book on The Nature of the Chemical Bond used the principles of quantum mechanics to deduce bond angles in ever-more complicated molecules. Pauling's work culminated in the physical modelling of DNA, the secret of life (in the words of Francis Crick, 1953). In the same year, the Miller–Urey experiment demonstrated in a simulation of primordial processes, that basic constituents of proteins, simple amino acids, could themselves be built up from simpler molecules, kickstarting decades of research into the chemical origins of life. By 1953, James D. Watson and Francis Crick clarified the basic structure of DNA, the genetic material for expressing life in all its forms, building on the work of Maurice Wilkins and Rosalind Franklin, suggested that the structure of DNA was a double helix. In their famous paper "Molecular structure of Nucleic Acids" In the late 20th century, the possibilities of genetic engineering became practical


id: history-of-science-20260505-17
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-17.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
=== Applications === In terms of applications, a massive number of new technologies were developed in the 20th century. Technologies such as electricity, the incandescent light bulb, the automobile and the phonograph, first developed at the end of the 19th century, were perfected and universally deployed. The first car was introduced by Karl Benz in 1885. The first airplane flight occurred in 1903, and by the end of the century airliners flew thousands of miles in a matter of hours. The development of the radio, television and computers caused massive changes in the dissemination of information. Advances in biology also led to large increases in food production, as well as the elimination of diseases such as polio by Dr. Jonas Salk. Gene mapping and gene sequencing, invented by Drs. Mark Skolnik and Walter Gilbert, respectively, are the two technologies that made the Human Genome Project feasible. Computer science, built upon a foundation of theoretical linguistics, discrete mathematics, and electrical engineering, studies the nature and limits of computation. Subfields include computability, computational complexity, database design, computer networking, artificial intelligence, and the design of computer hardware. One area in which advances in computing have contributed to more general scientific development is by


id: history-of-science-20260505-18
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science-18.md
category: reference
title: History of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:07.664184+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: history-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
== 21st century == In the early 21st century, some concepts that originated in 20th century physics were proven. On 4 July 2012, physicists working at CERN's Large Hadron Collider announced that they had discovered a new subatomic particle greatly resembling the Higgs boson, confirmed as such by the following March. Gravitational waves were first detected by astronomers at the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory on 14 September 2015. One of the first direct images of a black hole, taken by the Event Horizon Telescope in April of 2017, was released to the public on April 10, 2019. The Human Genome Project was declared complete in 2003. The CRISPR gene editing technique developed in 2012 allowed scientists to precisely and easily modify DNA in living organisms and led to the development of new medicine. Advances in synthetic biology with computer assistance led to the creation of artificial microbial life, such as JCVI-syn3.0 in 2016 and xenobots in 2020. Positive psychology is a branch of psychology founded in 1998 by Martin Seligman that is concerned with the study of happiness, mental well-being, and positive human functioning, and is a reaction to 20th century psychology's emphasis on mental illness and dysfunction. Starting around


id: international-encyclopedia-of-unified-science-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Encyclopedia_of_Unified_Science-0.md
category: reference
title: International Encyclopedia of Unified Science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Encyclopedia_of_Unified_Science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:08.890527+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: international-encyclopedia-of-unified-science-20260505-0
summary:
The International Encyclopedia of Unified Science (IEUS) was a series of publications devoted to unified science. The IEUS was conceived at the Mundaneum Institute in The Hague in the 1930s, and published in the United States beginning in 1938. It was an ambitious project that was never completed. The IEUS was an output of the Vienna Circle to address the "growing concern throughout the world for the logic, the history, and the sociology of science..." Only the first section Foundations of the Unity of Science (FUS) was published; it contains two volumes for a total of nineteen monographs published from 1938 to 1969. == International Congresses for the Unity of Science == Creation of the IEUS was facilitated by the International Congresses for the Unity of Science organized by members of the Vienna Circle. After a preliminary conference in Prague in 1934, the First International Congress for the Unity of Science was held at the Sorbonne, Paris, 16–21 September 1935. It was attended by about 170 people from over twenty different countries. With the active involvement of Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz (Poland), Susan Stebbing (England), and Federigo Enriques (Italy) the scope of the project for an IEUS was considerably expanded. The congress


id: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump-0.md
category: reference
title: Leviathan and the Air-Pump
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:10.162406+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-0
summary:
Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life (published 1985) is a book by Steven Shapin and Simon Schaffer. It examines the debate between Robert Boyle and Thomas Hobbes over Boyle's air-pump experiments in the 1660s. In 2005, Shapin and Schaffer were awarded the Erasmus Prize for this work. On a theoretical level, the book explores the acceptable methods of knowledge production, and societal factors related to the different knowledge systems promoted by Boyle and Hobbes. The "Leviathan" in the title is Hobbes's book on the structure of society, Leviathan, or The Matter, Forme and Power of a Common Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil and the "Air-Pump" is Robert Boyle's mechanical instrument. The book also contains a translation by Schaffer of Hobbes's Dialogus physicus de natura aeris. It attacked Boyle and others who founded the society for experimental research, soon known as the Royal Society. == Intention of the work == Shapin and Schaffer state in their first chapter, "Understanding Experiment", that they wish to answer the question, "Why does one do experiments in order to arrive at scientific truth?" Their aim is to use a historical account of the debate over the validity of Boyle's air pump experiments,


id: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump-1.md
category: reference
title: Leviathan and the Air-Pump
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:10.162406+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-0
summary:
== Chapter II: Seeing and Believing: The Experimental Production of Pneumatic Facts == Chapter Two outlines Boyle's theory of knowledge production, which revolves around the creation of the "matter of fact". This refers to an experimentally generated piece of knowledge separate from a universal theory and that was based on probability. This is in direct opposition to Hobbes (discussed in chapter 3), who required "absolute certainty" based on "logic and geometry" to consider a phenomenon a fact. In the eyes of Boyle and his colleagues, the abandonment of absolute certainty was not "a regrettable retreat from more ambitious goals; it was celebrated as a wise rejection of a failed project". Thus, because "matters of fact" did not have to be absolute, universal assent was not necessary for the production of knowledge. Boyle made use of three knowledge-producing technologies in order to produce knowledge: "a material technology embedded in the construction and operation of the air-pump; a literary technology by means of which the phenomena produced by the pump were made known to those who were not direct witnesses; and a social technology that incorporated the conventions that experimental philosophers should use in dealing with each other and considering knowledge-claims". Importantly,


id: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump-2.md
category: reference
title: Leviathan and the Air-Pump
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:10.162406+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-0
summary:
== Chapter III: Seeing Double: Hobbes's Politics of Plenism before 1660 == The third chapter centers on Hobbes' side of the debate for the effective production of knowledge. However, unlike Boyle, Hobbes denies that natural philosophy can be separated from politics and religion. In the previous chapter, Boyle's "matter of fact" worked towards separation from church and state by remaining objective and probabilistic. For Hobbes, however, "the boundaries Boyle proposed to erect and maintain were guarantees of continued disorder, not remedies to philosophical dissension". Hobbes also argued for "proper metaphysical language", in contrast to Boyle's reluctance to address the issue of a vacuum and his vague concept of air "pressure." Hobbes was motivated by three things in his attack on Boyle: (1) to save his own reputation as a natural philosopher, (2) to develop a system of knowledge production that secured order and maintained proper goals for natural philosophy (namely precision instead of probability) and (3) to be sensitive to the needs of Restoration society (discussed in more detail in chapter 7). Hobbes' denial of a vacuum stems in part from a need for political stability. It follows logically that if there can be a space which is devoid of


id: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump-3.md
category: reference
title: Leviathan and the Air-Pump
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:10.162406+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-0
summary:
Hobbes criticized Boyle's experimental space for being private (as it was exclusive to everyone but empiricists) and insisted that the space had a "master" - which undermined Boyle's concept of free discourse and consensus to generate matters of fact. Also he criticized the fact that, since the whole experimental community must come into agreement before a "matter of fact" can be produced, the whole experimental community must view the same demonstration at the same time. This was an obvious impossibility and was problematic for Boyle because "If they were not witnessed simultaneously and together, then in what ways was the evaluation of experimental testimony different from the evaluation of testimony generally?" Hobbes also criticized the air-pump itself, saying that "the physical integrity of the machine was massively violated." He asserted that "it was impossible to understand the air-pump experiments 'unless the nature of the air is known first.'" This was important for three reasons: (1) because Hobbes said the fluidity of the air ruled out the ability to produce an impermeable seal (2) because describing the air as mixture allowed Hobbes to explain the pumps actions (drawing out the course aspects of the air and leaving behind the more subtle


id: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump-4.md
category: reference
title: Leviathan and the Air-Pump
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:10.162406+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-0
summary:
== Chapter V: Boyle's Adversaries: Experiment Defended == While the previous chapter focuses on the attacks of Boyle's main opponent (Hobbes), this chapter focuses on Boyle's actions in the face of more general adversity. The three main opponents to Boyle were Hobbes, Linus and More, and Boyle's response to each in turn reflects his opinion of their ideas and shows what parts of his own ideas he deemed essential and what parts he deemed less so. The figures can be divided into two groups: Linus - who conformed to the model of the experimental programme but did not agree with Boyle's explanation of the air-pump experiments, and Hobbes and More - who attacked the experimental programme as an institution. "Linus said there was no vacuum in the Torricellian space. This was apparent because one could see through that space; if there were a vacuum, 'no visible species could proceed either from it, or through it, unto the eye." Linus offered a nonmechanical solution to the sustained height of the liquid in the Torricellian apparatus. He suggested that "a certain internal thread (funiculus) whose upper extremity was attached to the finger [blocking the top of the inverted tube] and whose lower


id: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-5
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump-5.md
category: reference
title: Leviathan and the Air-Pump
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:10.162406+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-0
summary:
== Chapter VI: Replication and Its Troubles: Air-Pumps in the 1660s == Chapter 6 is an evaluation of the technologies stated in chapter 2 and their role in replication - namely replication of the material technology and the utility of virtual witnessing. The chapter focuses on the propagation of the pump via the experimental community. The air-pump was first developed in Oxford and London with the help of the Royal Society (and in response to Hobbes criticism) beginning in 1659. It was during its development that Robert Moray wrote to Christiaan Huygens (Holland) detailing the changes Boyle would be making to the original design of his pump. Huygens rejected Boyle's changes and set about making his own alterations. "Christiaan Huygens was the only natural philosopher in the 1660s who built an air-pump that was outside the direct management of Boyle and Hooke." At the end of Huygens development, Huygens claimed that "my pneumatic pump was begun to work since yesterday, and all that night a bladder stayed inflated within it [which was a test for the goodness of a pump]...which Mr. Boyle was not able to effect." Indeed, he discovered a phenomenon called anomalous suspension (the suspension of water in


id: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-6
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump-6.md
category: reference
title: Leviathan and the Air-Pump
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:10.162406+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-0
summary:
== Chapter VIII: The Polity of Science: Conclusions == In the final chapter of Leviathan and the Air-Pump, Shapin and Schaffer condense their vastly complicated picture of Restoration society and how it interacted with the development of modern science to three points. "First, scientific practitioners have created, selected, and maintained a polity within which they operate and make intellectual product; second, the intellectual product made within that polity has become an element in political activity and in the state; third, there is a conditional relationship between the nature of the polity occupied by scientific intellectual and the nature of the wider polity." In proving those three points they say they had three things to connect: "(1) the polity of the intellectual community; (2) the solution to the practical problem of making and justifying knowledge; and (3) the polity of the wider society" and that they did so by connecting three things: "(1) that the solution to the problem of knowledge is political...(2) that the knowledge thus produced and authenticated become an element in political action in the wider polity...[and] (3) that the contest among alternative forms of life and their characteristic forms of intellectual product depend on the political success


id: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-7
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump-7.md
category: reference
title: Leviathan and the Air-Pump
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:10.162406+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-0
summary:
=== English editions === (Hardcover) Shapin, Steven; Schaffer, Simon (1985). Leviathan and the air-pump : Hobbes, Boyle, and the experimental life : including a translation of Thomas Hobbes, Dialogus physicus de natura aeris by Simon Schaffer (1st ed.). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-08393-2. OCLC 12078908. (Paperback) Shapin, Steven; Schaffer, Simon (1989) [1985]. Leviathan and the air-pump : Hobbes, Boyle, and the experimental life : including a translation of Thomas Hobbes, Dialogus physicus de natura aeris by Simon Schaffer (1st Princeton paperback printing, with corrections ed.). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-02432-4. OCLC 21974013. (eBook) Shapin, Steven; Schaffer, Simon (2011). Leviathan and the air-pump : Hobbes, Boyle, and the experimental life : with a new introduction by the authors (2nd ed.). Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-1-4008-3849-3. OCLC 759907750. (Paperback) Shapin, Steven; Schaffer, Simon (2017). Leviathan and the air-pump : Hobbes, Boyle, and the experimental life (First Princeton Classics paperback ed.). Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-17816-5. OCLC 984327399. === Translations === Shapin, Steven; Schaffer, Simon (1993). Leviathan et la pompe à air: Hobbes et Boyle entre science et politique (in French). Translated by Piélat, Thierry; Barjansky, Sylvie. Paris: Ed. La Découverte. ISBN 978-2-7071-2273-5.


id: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-8
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump-8.md
category: reference
title: Leviathan and the Air-Pump
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_and_the_Air-Pump
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:10.162406+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: leviathan-and-the-air-pump-20260505-0
summary:
=== Other === Abbri, Ferdinando (January 1987). "Steven Shapin, Simon Schaffer, Leviathan and the Air-Pump. Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life, Princeton, Princeton University Press 1985, XIV + 440 pp". Nuncius. 2 (1): 241–244. doi:10.1163/182539177X00935. ISSN 0394-7394. Hackmann, W. D. (May 1986). "Fuss over nothing". Nature. 321 (6069): 480. Bibcode:1986Natur.321..480H. doi:10.1038/321480a0. ISSN 1476-4687. S2CID 38738481. Hankins, T. L. (23 May 1986). "A Debate over Experiment: Leviathan and the Air-Pump". Science. 232 (4753): 1040–1042. doi:10.1126/science.232.4753.1040. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 17759318. Kargon, Robert (Winter 1986). "Steven Shapin & Simon Schaffer. Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press. 1985. Pp. xiv, 440. $60.00". Albion. 18 (4): 665–666. doi:10.2307/4050153. ISSN 0095-1390. JSTOR 4050153. Jacob, Margaret C. (December 1986). "Review of Leviathan and the Air Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life". Isis. 77 (4): 719–720. doi:10.1086/354315. ISSN 0021-1753. JSTOR 233211. Hall, M. B. (1 November 1986). "Reviews". Ambix. 33 (3): 157–167. doi:10.1179/amb.1986.33.2-3.153. ISSN 0002-6980. Hall, M. B. (1986). "Book reviews". Annals of Science. 43 (6): 575–576. doi:10.1080/00033798600200381. ISSN 0003-3790. PMID 8416581. Jones, Harold W. (January 1987). "Review of 'Leviathan' and the Air Pump: Hobbes, Boyle and the Experimental Life. Including a Translation of Thomas Hobbes, 'Dialogus


id: limiting-case-philosophy-of-science-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limiting_case_(philosophy_of_science)-0.md
category: reference
title: Limiting case (philosophy of science)
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limiting_case_(philosophy_of_science)
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:11.516711+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: limiting-case-philosophy-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
In the philosophy of science, under the correspondence principle, a limiting case theory is an earlier theory which becomes incorporated into a later, usually broader theory; that is to say, the earlier (limiting case) theory proves to be a special or limited case of the later theory. Technically, a theory is said to be a limiting case of another, later theory when and if the later theory subsumes the theoretical relations and apparent referents of the earlier one. For example, physicists agree that classical mechanics constitutes a low-energy limiting case of relativity theory. In words of Larry Laudan, realist philosophers use this phrase in the sense that the theory "T1 can be a limiting case of [the theory] T2 only if (a) all the variables (observable and theoretical) assigned a value in T1 are assigned a value by T2 and (b) the values assigned to every variable of T1 are the same as, or very close to, the values T2 assigns to the corresponding variable when certain initial and boundary conditions—consistent with T2—are specified". The idea that a theory (in our previous example, Newtonian mechanics) that is close to being true (i.e., that is verisimil) converges as a limiting case


id: memex-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memex-0.md
category: reference
title: Memex
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memex
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:12.753614+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: memex-20260505-0
summary:
A memex (a portmanteau of "memory" and "index") is a hypothetical electromechanical device for interacting with microform documents and described in Vannevar Bush's 1945 article "As We May Think". Bush envisioned the memex as a device in which individuals would compress and store all of their books, records, and communications, "mechanized so that it may be consulted with exceeding speed and flexibility". The individual was supposed to use the memex as an automatic personal filing system, making the memex "an enlarged intimate supplement to his memory". The concept of the memex influenced the development of early hypertext systems and personal knowledge base software. The hypothetical implementation depicted by Bush for the purpose of concrete illustration was based upon a document bookmark list of static microfilm pages and lacked a true hypertext system, where parts of pages would have internal structure beyond the common textual format. == Development == === An electromechanical memex device === In "As We May Think", Vannevar Bush describes a memex as an electromechanical device enabling individuals to develop and read a large self-contained research library, create and follow associative trails of links and personal annotations, and recall these trails at any time to share them with


id: memex-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memex-1.md
category: reference
title: Memex
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memex
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:12.753614+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: memex-20260505-0
summary:
Wholly new forms of encyclopedias will appear, ready-made with a mesh of associative trails running through them, ready to be dropped into the memex and there amplified. The lawyer has at his touch the associated opinions and decisions of his whole experience, and of the experience of friends and authorities. The patent attorney has on call the millions of issued patents, with familiar trails to every point of his client's interest. The physician, puzzled by a patient's reactions, strikes the trail established in studying an earlier similar case, and runs rapidly through analogous case histories, with side references to the classics for the pertinent anatomy and histology. ... The historian, with a vast chronological account of a people, parallels it with a skip trail that stops only on the salient items and can follow at any time contemporary trails which lead him all over civilization at a particular epoch. There is a new profession of trailblazers, those who find delight in the task of establishing useful trails through the enormous mass of the common record. The inheritance from the master becomes, not only his additions to the world's record but for his disciples the entire scaffolding by which they were


id: memex-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memex-2.md
category: reference
title: Memex
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memex
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:12.753614+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: memex-20260505-0
summary:
== 1967 Memex revisited == Vannevar Bush published the retrospective article "Memex Revisited" in his 1967 book Science Is Not Enough. Over two decades after his initial conception of the Memex, Bush details the various technological advancements that have made his vision a possibility. Specifically, Bush cites photocells, transistors, cathode ray tubes, magnetic and videotape, "high-speed electric circuits", and "miniaturization of solid-state devices" such as the TV and radio. The article claims that magnetic tape would be central to the creation of a modern Memex device. The erasable quality of the tape is of special significance, as this would allow for modification of information stored in the proposed Memex. In the article, Bush stresses the continued importance of supplementing "how creative men think" and relates that the systems for indexing data are still insufficient and rely too much on linear pathways rather than the association-based system of the human brain. Bush writes that a machine with the "speed and flexibility" of the brain is not attainable, but improvements could be made in regard to the capacity to obtain informational "permanence and clarity". Bush also relates that, unlike digital technology, Memex would be of no significant aid to business or profitable


id: mental-models-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Models-0.md
category: reference
title: Mental Models
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Models
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:13.919010+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: mental-models-20260505-0
summary:
Mental Models is a book published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., in 1983 ISBN 0-89859-242-9. It was edited by Dedre Gentner and Albert L. Stevens, both employees of Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Inc. at the time. It appeared at about the same time as a book by the same name by Philip Johnson-Laird. According to the acknowledgment of the book, it resulted from a workshop on mental models held at the University of California, San Diego in October 1980, that was jointly sponsored by the Office of Naval Research and the Sloan Foundation. == Chapters == Some Observations on Mental Models — Donald A. Norman, UCSD Dr. Norman describes the properties of mental models — that they can be contradictory, incomplete, superstitious, erroneous, and unstable, varying in time. So the job of system designers is to help users form an accurate and useful mental model of a system. And the job of researchers is to set up experiments to learn to understand actual mental models, even though they may be messy and incomplete. Phenomenology and the Evolution of Intuition — Andrea diSessa, MIT Surrogates and Mappings: Two Kinds of Conceptual Models for Interactive Devices — Richard M. Young, Medical Research


id: mundaneum-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mundaneum-0.md
category: reference
title: Mundaneum
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mundaneum
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:15.150938+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: mundaneum-20260505-0
summary:
The Mundaneum was an institution which aimed to gather together all the world's knowledge and classify it according to a system known as the Universal Decimal Classification. It was developed at the turn of the 20th century by Belgian lawyers Paul Otlet and Henri La Fontaine. The Mundaneum has been identified as a milestone in the history of data collection and management, and, albeit more tenuously, as a precursor to the Internet. In the 21st century, the Mundaneum is a non-profit organisation based in Mons, Belgium, that runs an exhibition space, website, and archive, which celebrate the legacy of the original Mundaneum. == History == The Mundaneum was created in 1910, following an initiative begun in 1895 by Belgian lawyers Paul Otlet and Henri La Fontaine, as part of their work on documentation science. Otlet first called it the Palais Mondial ("World Palace"), and it occupied the left wing of the Cinquantenaire Palace, a government building in Brussels. Otlet and La Fontaine organized an International Conference of International Associations, which was the origin of the Union of International Associations (UIA). Otlet regarded the project as the centrepiece of a new "world city"—a centrepiece, which eventually became an archive with more


id: olympia-academy-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympia_Academy-0.md
category: reference
title: Olympia Academy
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympia_Academy
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:16.306357+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: olympia-academy-20260505-0
summary:
The Olympia Academy (German: Akademie Olympia) was a group of friends in Bern, Switzerland, who met – usually at Albert Einstein's apartment – to discuss philosophy and physics. == Overview == The group was founded in 1902 by Einstein, Conrad Habicht, and Maurice Solovine, and played a significant role in Einstein's intellectual development. Before his "miracle year" (1905), when Einstein was a patent clerk in Bern, the group of friends met to debate books in the fields of physics and philosophy. The group's origin lay in Einstein's need to offer private lessons in mathematics and physics in order to make a living (in 1901, before he took up his post at the patent office in Bern). Solovine, a Romanian philosophy student, answered Einstein's newspaper advertisement. In fact neither the tutorials nor any payment materialised; instead, the two began to meet regularly to discuss their shared interest in physics and philosophy. They were soon joined by the mathematician Habicht, who was Einstein's neighbour at Schaffhausen; in 1902 they named themselves the Akademie Olympia, and though a friend would occasionally join them in one of their meetings, the Academy remained essentially just the trio of Einstein, Habicht, and Solovine until the latter


id: ortega-hypothesis-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ortega_hypothesis-0.md
category: reference
title: Ortega hypothesis
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ortega_hypothesis
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:17.503332+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: ortega-hypothesis-20260505-0
summary:
The Ortega hypothesis holds that average or mediocre scientists contribute substantially to the advancement of science. According to this hypothesis, scientific progress occurs mainly by the accumulation of a mass of modest, narrowly specialized intellectual contributions. On this view, major breakthroughs draw heavily upon a large body of minor and little-known work, without which the major advances could not happen. == Citation research == The Ortega hypothesis is widely held, but a number of systematic studies of scientific citations have favored the opposing "Newton hypothesis", which says that scientific progress is mostly the work of a relatively small number of great scientists (after Isaac Newton's statement that he "stood on the shoulders of giants"). The most important papers mostly cite other important papers by a small number of outstanding scientists, suggesting that the breakthroughs do not actually draw heavily on a large body of minor work. Rather, the pattern of citations suggests that most minor work draws heavily on a small number of outstanding papers and outstanding scientists. Even minor papers by the most eminent scientists are cited much more than papers by relatively unknown scientists; and these elite scientists are clustered mostly in a small group of elite departments


id: the-oxford-book-of-modern-science-writing-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Oxford_Book_of_Modern_Science_Writing-0.md
category: reference
title: The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Oxford_Book_of_Modern_Science_Writing
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:18.696109+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-oxford-book-of-modern-science-writing-20260505-0
summary:
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing is an anthology of scientific writings, arranged and introduced by Richard Dawkins of the University of Oxford. Published first in March 2008, it contains 83 writings on many topics from a diverse variety of authors, which range in length from one to eight pages. All inclusions are dated post-1900, and include poetry, anecdotes, and general philosophical musings. == Contents == The book is divided into four segments. The following is a list of pieces included in each segment. === What Scientists Study === from: The Mysterious Universe by James Jeans Just Six Numbers by Martin Rees Creation Revisited by Peter Atkins The Ant and the Peacock by Helena Cronin The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection by R. A. Fisher Mankind Evolving by Theodosius Dobzhansky Adaptation and Natural Selection by G. C. Williams Life Itself: Its Origin and Nature by Francis Crick Genome by Matt Ridley "Theoretical Biology in the Third Millennium" by Sydney Brenner The Language of the Genes by Steve Jones "On Being the Right Size", an essay by J. B. S. Haldane The Explanation of Organic Diversity by Mark Ridley "The Importance of the Nervous System in the Evolution of Animal


id: patronage-in-astronomy-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage_in_astronomy-0.md
category: reference
title: Patronage in astronomy
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage_in_astronomy
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:19.865470+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: patronage-in-astronomy-20260505-0
summary:
Patronage in astronomy is an approach which one can use to examine the history of astronomy from a cultural standpoint. Rather than simply focusing on the findings and discoveries of individual astronomers, this approach emphasizes the importance of patronage in shaping the field of astronomy. == Importance to the history of science == An often overlooked dimension in the history of science, the patronage system and the realities that existed within such a system played an important role in the lives of many of science's icons and heroes. The history of astronomy in particular is filled with examples demonstrating the relationship between patron and client, including that of Galileo Galilei and his ties to the Medici family. Many historians have begun to examine the importance of examining scientific history through this relatively forgotten lens. Dr. Robert Smith, in an article examining patronage in the early history of NASA, begins with the assertion that “the history of space astronomy is usually written from the perspective of the remarkable scientific findings garnered by space astronomers and the ways these findings have enriched and guided new views of the universe.” But, as Barker and Goldstein ensure, “following the groundbreaking work of Robert Westman


id: patronage-in-astronomy-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage_in_astronomy-1.md
category: reference
title: Patronage in astronomy
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage_in_astronomy
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:19.865470+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: patronage-in-astronomy-20260505-0
summary:
=== Nicholas Jardine === In his article titled The Places of Astronomy in Early-Modern Culture, Nicholas Jardine looks to examine how the system of patronage and the codes of courtly conduct shaped a new agenda for astronomy: the quest for the true world system. Jardine begins his article by noting that astronomy “did not then make up a specialty or discipline in anything like the modern sense… rather, it comprised a whole series of practices widely diffused through the various social sites and strata.” The focus of University teachings on astronomy was “predominantly practical and utilitarian, directed towards the calendrical, navigational, agricultural, and above all, medical applications of the subject… [p]lanetary models were on the whole considered as fictions devised for predictive purposes.” But, during the course of the sixteenth century “there arose an entirely new kind of princely and aristocratic involvement in astronomy, an involvement in which astronomical observations, instruments, models, and ultimately world systems themselves became objects of courtly production, exchange, and competition.” Some notable places of this “new courtly culture of astronomy were the court of Landgraf Wilhelm IV of Hesse-Kassel, Tycho Brahe’s island of Hven (held in fief from Frederick II of Denmark) and, some decades


id: patronage-in-astronomy-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage_in_astronomy-2.md
category: reference
title: Patronage in astronomy
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage_in_astronomy
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:19.865470+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: patronage-in-astronomy-20260505-0
summary:
=== Mario Biagioli === In his book, Galileo Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism, Mario Biagioli looks to shed light on the ways in which a society characterized by patronage relationships affected one of astronomy's, and modern science's, greatest heroes: Galileo Galilei. Biagioli looks to uncover aspects of Galileo's life by “vividly [presenting] the pioneer physicist to us through the active social relations he experienced with persons in the different courts with which he was connected.” The book reveals how Galileo “used patronage to obtain his teaching position in Pisa… [and] maneuvered his transfer from Padua to the “home court” of the Medicis... used contacts with Prince Cesi and other well-placed persons in Roman circles to become an Academian, and a person of influence, and how all of this turned to dust for Galileo, when he lost the patronage of Urban VIII, one of his two most special patrons”. In a review of Biagioli's work, Larry Wolff noted Biagioli as demonstrating Galileo's legitimacy as a direct consequence of “his ‘career strategies’” and not just “his ‘cognitive attitudes’” and that Galileo is shown to be a master of attaining power and a seventeenth-century career in science The


id: patronage-in-astronomy-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage_in_astronomy-3.md
category: reference
title: Patronage in astronomy
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage_in_astronomy
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:19.865470+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: patronage-in-astronomy-20260505-0
summary:
[H]e saw the telescope more as an instrument of patronage than as an instrument of astronomy. When Galileo, having seized what the moon and stars could quickly offer, had turned his telescope on the next brightest object in the evening sky, Jupiter, early in January, Venus was visible in the predawn sky. For a Copernican, Venus was in a critical part of its orbit, past maximum elongation, approaching superior conjunction, and thus exhibiting a shape incompatible with the Ptolemaic system. As we have seen, however, Jupiter had offered something quite different, an incomparable present to the grand duke, and Galileo had not paused to look further. Westfall questions Galileo's commitment to Copernicanism, and instead views Galileo as being more concerned with finding discoveries that could help further his patronage relationship, and that Galileo was prepared to try to monopolize the telescope in order to do so. == See also == History of Science History of Astronomy Age of Enlightenment Galileo Galilei Galileo Affair Johannes Kepler Tycho Brahe Nicolaus Copernicus == Notes == == References == Barker, Peter, and Bernard R. Goldstein. "Patronage and the Production of De Revolutionibus." Journal for the History of Astronomy (ISSN 0021-8286), Vol. 34, Part 4,


id: philosophy-of-science-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science-0.md
category: reference
title: Philosophy of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:22.506236+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: philosophy-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
Philosophy of science (also theory of science) is the branch of philosophy concerned with the foundations, methods, and implications of science. Amongst its central questions are the difference between science and non-science, the reliability of scientific theories, and the ultimate purpose and meaning of science as a human endeavour. Philosophy of science focuses on metaphysical, epistemic and semantic aspects of scientific practice, and overlaps with metaphysics, ontology, logic, and epistemology, for example, when it explores the relationship between science and the concept of truth. Philosophy of science is both a theoretical and empirical discipline, relying on philosophical theorising as well as meta-studies of scientific practice. Ethical issues such as bioethics and scientific misconduct are often considered ethics or science studies rather than the philosophy of science. Many of the central problems concerned with the philosophy of science lack contemporary consensus, including whether science can infer truth about unobservable entities and whether inductive reasoning can be justified as yielding definite scientific knowledge. Philosophers of science also consider philosophical problems within particular sciences (such as biology, physics and social sciences such as economics and psychology). Some philosophers of science also use contemporary results in science to reach conclusions about philosophy itself. While


id: philosophy-of-science-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science-1.md
category: reference
title: Philosophy of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:22.506236+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: philosophy-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
A closely related question is what counts as a good scientific explanation. In addition to providing predictions about future events, society often takes scientific theories to provide explanations for events that occur regularly or have already occurred. Philosophers have investigated the criteria by which a scientific theory can be said to have successfully explained a phenomenon, as well as what it means to say a scientific theory has explanatory power. One early and influential account of scientific explanation is the deductive-nomological model. It says that a successful scientific explanation must deduce the occurrence of the phenomena in question from a scientific law. This view has been subjected to substantial criticism, resulting in several widely acknowledged counterexamples to the theory. It is especially challenging to characterize what is meant by an explanation when the thing to be explained cannot be deduced from any law because it is a matter of chance, or otherwise cannot be perfectly predicted from what is known. Wesley Salmon developed a model in which a good scientific explanation must be statistically relevant to the outcome to be explained. Others have argued that the key to a good explanation is unifying disparate phenomena or providing a causal mechanism.


id: philosophy-of-science-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science-2.md
category: reference
title: Philosophy of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:22.506236+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: philosophy-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
Should science aim to determine ultimate truth, or are there questions that science cannot answer? Scientific realists claim that science aims at truth and that one ought to regard scientific theories as true, approximately true, or likely true. Conversely, scientific anti-realists argue that science does not aim (or at least does not succeed) at truth, especially truth about unobservables like electrons or other universes. Instrumentalists argue that scientific theories should only be evaluated on whether they are useful. In their view, whether theories are true or not is beside the point, because the purpose of science is to make predictions and enable effective technology. Realists often point to the success of recent scientific theories as evidence for the truth (or near truth) of current theories. Antirealists point to either the many false theories in the history of science, epistemic morals, the success of false modeling assumptions, or widely termed postmodern criticisms of objectivity as evidence against scientific realism. Antirealists attempt to explain the success of scientific theories without reference to truth. Some antirealists claim that scientific theories aim at being accurate only about observable objects and argue that their success is primarily judged by that criterion. ==== Real patterns ====


id: philosophy-of-science-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science-3.md
category: reference
title: Philosophy of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:22.506236+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: philosophy-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
Instrumentalism became popular among physicists around the turn of the 20th century, after which logical positivism defined the field for several decades. Logical positivism accepts only testable statements as meaningful, rejects metaphysical interpretations, and embraces verificationism (a set of theories of knowledge that combines logicism, empiricism, and linguistics to ground philosophy on a basis consistent with examples from the empirical sciences). Seeking to overhaul all of philosophy and convert it to a new scientific philosophy, the Berlin Circle and the Vienna Circle propounded logical positivism in the late 1920s. Interpreting Ludwig Wittgenstein's early philosophy of language, logical positivists identified a verifiability principle or criterion of cognitive meaningfulness. From Bertrand Russell's logicism they sought reduction of mathematics to logic. They also embraced Russell's logical atomism, Ernst Mach's phenomenalism—whereby the mind knows only actual or potential sensory experience, which is the content of all sciences, whether physics or psychology—and Percy Bridgman's operationalism. Thereby, only the verifiable was scientific and cognitively meaningful, whereas the unverifiable was unscientific, cognitively meaningless "pseudostatements"—metaphysical, emotive, or such—not worthy of further review by philosophers, who were newly tasked to organize knowledge rather than develop new knowledge. Logical positivism is commonly portrayed as taking the extreme position that scientific


id: philosophy-of-science-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science-4.md
category: reference
title: Philosophy of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:22.506236+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: philosophy-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
That there is an objective reality shared by all rational observers."The basis for rationality is acceptance of an external objective reality." "Objective reality is clearly an essential thing if we are to develop a meaningful perspective of the world. Nevertheless its very existence is assumed." "Our belief that objective reality exist is an assumption that it arises from a real world outside of ourselves. As infants we made this assumption unconsciously. People are happy to make this assumption that adds meaning to our sensations and feelings, than live with solipsism." "Without this assumption, there would be only the thoughts and images in our own mind (which would be the only existing mind) and there would be no need of science, or anything else." That this objective reality is governed by natural laws; "Science, at least today, assumes that the universe obeys knowable principles that don't depend on time or place, nor on subjective parameters such as what we think, know or how we behave." Hugh Gauch argues that science presupposes that "the physical world is orderly and comprehensible." That reality can be discovered by means of systematic observation and experimentation.Stanley Sobottka said: "The assumption of external reality is necessary for


id: philosophy-of-science-20260505-5
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science-5.md
category: reference
title: Philosophy of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:22.506236+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: philosophy-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
Paul Feyerabend (1924–1994) argued that no description of scientific method could possibly be broad enough to include all the approaches and methods used by scientists, and that there are no useful and exception-free methodological rules governing the progress of science. He argued that "the only principle that does not inhibit progress is: anything goes". Feyerabend said that science started as a liberating movement, but that over time it had become increasingly dogmatic and rigid and had some oppressive features, and thus had become increasingly an ideology. Because of this, he said it was impossible to come up with an unambiguous way to distinguish science from religion, magic, or mythology. He saw the exclusive dominance of science as a means of directing society as authoritarian and ungrounded. Promulgation of this epistemological anarchism earned Feyerabend the title of "the worst enemy of science" from his detractors. === Sociology of scientific knowledge methodology === According to Kuhn, science is an inherently communal activity which can only be done as part of a community. For him, the fundamental difference between science and other disciplines is the way in which the communities function. Others, especially Feyerabend and some post-modernist thinkers, have argued that there is


id: philosophy-of-science-20260505-6
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science-6.md
category: reference
title: Philosophy of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:22.506236+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: philosophy-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
== Other topics == === Reductionism === Analysis involves breaking an observation or theory down into simpler concepts in order to understand it. Reductionism can refer to one of several philosophical positions related to this approach. One type of reductionism suggests that phenomena are amenable to scientific explanation at lower levels of analysis and inquiry. Perhaps a historical event might be explained in sociological and psychological terms, which in turn might be described in terms of human physiology, which in turn might be described in terms of chemistry and physics. Daniel Dennett distinguishes legitimate reductionism from what he calls greedy reductionism, which denies real complexities and leaps too quickly to sweeping generalizations. === Social accountability === A broad issue affecting the neutrality of science concerns the areas which science chooses to explore—that is, what part of the world and of humankind are studied by science. Philip Kitcher in his Science, Truth, and Democracy argues that scientific studies that attempt to show one segment of the population as being less intelligent, less successful, or emotionally backward compared to others have a political feedback effect which further excludes such groups from access to science. Thus such studies undermine the broad consensus required


id: philosophy-of-science-20260505-7
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science-7.md
category: reference
title: Philosophy of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:22.506236+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: philosophy-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
Philosophy of biology deals with epistemological, metaphysical, and ethical issues in the biological and biomedical sciences. Although philosophers of science and philosophers generally have long been interested in biology (e.g., Aristotle, Descartes, Leibniz and even Kant), philosophy of biology only emerged as an independent field of philosophy in the 1960s and 1970s. Philosophers of science began to pay increasing attention to developments in biology, from the rise of the modern synthesis in the 1930s and 1940s to the discovery of the structure of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) in 1953 to more recent advances in genetic engineering. Other key ideas such as the reduction of all life processes to biochemical reactions as well as the incorporation of psychology into a broader neuroscience are also addressed. Research in current philosophy of biology includes investigation of the foundations of evolutionary theory (such as Peter Godfrey-Smith's work), and the role of viruses as persistent symbionts in host genomes. As a consequence, the evolution of genetic content order is seen as the result of competent genome editors in contrast to former narratives in which error replication events (mutations) dominated. === Philosophy of medicine === Beyond medical ethics and bioethics, the philosophy of medicine is a branch


id: philosophy-of-science-20260505-8
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science-8.md
category: reference
title: Philosophy of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:22.506236+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: philosophy-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
The philosophy of social science is the study of the logic and method of the social sciences, such as sociology and cultural anthropology. Philosophers of social science are concerned with the differences and similarities between the social and the natural sciences, causal relationships between social phenomena, the possible existence of social laws, and the ontological significance of structure and agency. The French philosopher, Auguste Comte (1798–1857), established the epistemological perspective of positivism in The Course in Positivist Philosophy, a series of texts published between 1830 and 1842. The first three volumes of the Course dealt chiefly with the natural sciences already in existence (geoscience, astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology), whereas the latter two emphasised the inevitable coming of social science: "sociologie". For Comte, the natural sciences had to necessarily arrive first, before humanity could adequately channel its efforts into the most challenging and complex "Queen science" of human society itself. Comte offers an evolutionary system proposing that society undergoes three phases in its quest for the truth according to a general 'law of three stages'. These are (1) the theological, (2) the metaphysical, and (3) the positive. Comte's positivism established the initial philosophical foundations for formal sociology and social research. Durkheim,


id: proofs-and-refutations-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proofs_and_Refutations-0.md
category: reference
title: Proofs and Refutations
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proofs_and_Refutations
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:23.745480+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: proofs-and-refutations-20260505-0
summary:
Proofs and Refutations: The Logic of Mathematical Discovery is a 1976 book by philosopher Imre Lakatos expounding his view of the progress of mathematics. The book is written as a series of Socratic dialogues involving a group of students who discuss proposed proofs of Euler's polyhedral formula. A central theme is that definitions are not carved in stone, but often have to be patched up in the light of later insights, in particular failed proofs. This gives mathematics a somewhat experimental flavour. At the end of the Introduction, Lakatos explains that his purpose is to challenge formalism in mathematics, and to show that informal mathematics grows by a logic of "proofs and refutations". == Background == The 1976 book Proofs and Refutations is based on the first three chapters of his 1961 four-chapter doctoral thesis Essays in the Logic of Mathematical Discovery. But its first chapter is Lakatos's own revision of its chapter 1 that was first published as Proofs and Refutations in four parts in 1963–4 in the British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. == Synopsis == Many important logical ideas are explained in the book. For example, the difference between a counterexample to a lemma (a so-called


id: richard-dawkins-how-a-scientist-changed-the-way-we-think-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins:_How_a_Scientist_Changed_the_Way_We_Think-0.md
category: reference
title: Richard Dawkins: How a Scientist Changed the Way We Think
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins:_How_a_Scientist_Changed_the_Way_We_Think
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:24.953751+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: richard-dawkins-how-a-scientist-changed-the-way-we-think-20260505-0
summary:
Richard Dawkins: How a Scientist Changed the Way We Think is a festschrift of 25 essays written in recognition of the life and work of Richard Dawkins. It was published in 2006, to coincide with the 30th anniversary of the publication of The Selfish Gene. A wide range of topics is covered from many fields including evolutionary biology, philosophy, and psychology. Space is also given to writers who are not in full agreement with Dawkins. The book is edited by two of Dawkins' former PhD students, Alan Grafen and Mark Ridley. (ISBN 9780199291168) == Reception == The reviews of the book have been mixed, but the controversial title phrase, "How a Scientist Changed the Way We Think" has been explained by considering Dawkins to have worked as an influential educator and concise author, of The Selfish Gene, who promoted the key ideas of others about evolutionary biology, also including some controversial ideas which are not as widely accepted. As the author of a popular science book, Dawkins had popularized ideas by George Williams in critiquing group selection, William Hamilton on the theory of kin selection in evolution, biologist/geneticist John Maynard Smith on evolutionarily stable strategies, and Robert Trivers about reciprocal


id: science-and-civilisation-in-china-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_Civilisation_in_China-0.md
category: reference
title: Science and Civilisation in China
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_Civilisation_in_China
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:26.249829+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-and-civilisation-in-china-20260505-0
summary:
Science and Civilisation in China (1954–present) is an ongoing series of books about the history of science and technology in China published by Cambridge University Press. It was initiated and edited by British historian Joseph Needham (1900–1995). Needham was a well-respected scientist before undertaking this encyclopedia and was even responsible for the "S" in UNESCO. To date there have been seven volumes in twenty-seven books. The series was on the Modern Library Board's 100 Best Nonfiction books of the 20th century. Needham's work was the first of its kind to praise Chinese scientific contributions and provide their history and connection to global knowledge in contrast to eurocentric historiography. By asking his grand questions: why did modern science not develop in China, and why China was technologically superior to the West prior to the 16th century, Needham’s Science and Civilisation in China is also recognized as one of the most influential works in stimulating the discourse on the multicultural roots of modern science. In 1954, Needham—along with an international team of collaborators—initiated the project to study the science, technology, and civilisation of ancient China. This project produced a series of volumes published by Cambridge University Press. The project is still continuing


id: science-and-civilisation-in-china-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_Civilisation_in_China-1.md
category: reference
title: Science and Civilisation in China
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_Civilisation_in_China
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:26.249829+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-and-civilisation-in-china-20260505-0
summary:
=== Critical acclaim === Groff Conklin of Galaxy Science Fiction in 1955 said that Vol. 1 "presents a richly patterned tapestry of the development of civilization in the Far East", and that "it is for everyone who is intrigued by the unknown, whether future (science fiction) or past (scientific history)". Jonathan Spence wrote in a 1982 New York Times article "this work is the most ambitious undertaking in Chinese studies during this century". The New York Times obituary for Needham stated that students of China hail Needham's encyclopedia and compare him to Charles Darwin in terms of importance regarding scientific knowledge. In 1999 Roger Hart published Beyond Science and Civilization: A Post-Needham Critique giving more analysis of Needham's work about how sciences of the West and China differed in practice to make for different historical attributes. According to Arun Bala, the author of The Dialogue of Civilizations in the Birth of Modern Science, Needham postulates that scientific knowledge may evolve to more closely resemble Chinese philosophical views of nature; signifying his belief in Chinese inherent wisdom. === Criticism from scholars === Science and Civilisation in China was welcomed and is highly regarded among scholars because of its extensive comparative coverage


id: science-and-civilisation-in-china-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_Civilisation_in_China-2.md
category: reference
title: Science and Civilisation in China
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_Civilisation_in_China
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:26.249829+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-and-civilisation-in-china-20260505-0
summary:
=== Scholarly Discourse === In the late 1950s and early 1960s, in response to Needham’s Science and Civilisation in China, Western historians insisted that modern science was unique to Western civilizations. Scholars like Roger Hart stated that Needham’s work was significant in helping change the criteria for defining modern science. In Hart’s Imagined Civilizations: China, The West, and Their First Encounter, Hart introduces the idea of the “Great Divide” between “the primitive non-West and the modern West” in the history of science. Hart explains the concept of the “Great Divide” as the perception that non-Western civilizations practiced false sciences and he criticizes the Eurocentric claim that the development of modern science was uniquely Western. Bala’s The Dialogue of Civilizations in the Birth of Modern Science examines historical and epistemological presumptions in order to break from the Eurocentric view of the development of modern science. Needham’s juxtaposition of the attributes of Eastern and Western science influenced Bala to postulate that the future of science could be close to the Chinese view of nature. Needham and his co-authors are credited for amassing a plethora of evidence regarding the influence and contributions of Chinese technologies and ideas that allowed for the growth of


id: science-in-a-free-society-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_in_a_Free_Society-0.md
category: reference
title: Science in a Free Society
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_in_a_Free_Society
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:28.827208+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-in-a-free-society-20260505-0
summary:
Science in a Free Society is the 2nd full length book by the Austrian philosopher of science, Paul Feyerabend. It was published in 1978 by Schocken Books and later reprinted by Verso Books. While Feyerabend never published a second edition, Verso pressed four copies in 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1987. Parts of the book were reprinted in later editions of Against Method. The book largely develops arguments from the first edition of Against Method and spells out their political implications. The book also contains a collection of previously published material in which he responds to some of his critics of Against Method. In 1979, Feyerabend also published, in German, Erkenntnis für freie Menschen (Knowledge for Free People), which contains roughly two-thirds of the material from Science in a Society while expanding on some sections and diminishing others. == Content == The book is divided into three sections: "Reason and Practice" expounds Feyerabend's theory of rationality as something embedded in, rather than separate from, traditions. "Science in a Free Society" develops Feyerabend's views about the place of science in democratic societies. "Conversations with Illiterates" provides responses to criticisms of Against Method. === Reason and Practice === The first section develops a


id: scientific-communication-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_communication-0.md
category: reference
title: Scientific communication
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_communication
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:30.132292+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: scientific-communication-20260505-0
summary:
Scientific communication is a part of information science and the sociology of science which study researchers' use of formal and informal information channels, their communicative roles (e.g., "gatekeepers"), the utilization of the formal publication system and similar issues. == Literature == Björk, B.C. (2005). A lifecycle model of the scientific communication process. LEARNED PUBLISHING, 18(3), 165–176. Fjordback Søndergaard, Trine; Andersen, Jack & Hjørland, Birger (2003). Documents and the communication of scientific and scholarly information. Revising and updating the UNISIST model. Hurd, J. M. (2000). The transformation of scientific communication: A model for 2020. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(14), 1279–1283. Kling, R. & McKim, G. (2000). Not just a matter of time: Field differences and the shaping of electronic media in supporting scientific communication. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, 51(14), 1306–1320. Nelson, C. E. & Pollock, D. K. (Eds.). (1970). Communication Among Scientists and Engineers. Lexington, Massachusetts: Health Lexington Books. Meadows, A. J. (1974). Communication in Science. London: Butterworths. Meadows, A. J. (1998). Communicating Research. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Mogull, S. A. (2017). Scientific and Medical Communication: A Guide for Effective Practice. New York: Routledge. Vickery, B. (2000). Scientific Communication in History. Lanham,


id: scientific-community-metaphor-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_community_metaphor-0.md
category: reference
title: Scientific community metaphor
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_community_metaphor
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:31.470794+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: scientific-community-metaphor-20260505-0
summary:
In computer science, the scientific community metaphor is a metaphor used to aid understanding scientific communities. The first publications on the scientific community metaphor in 1981 and 1982 involved the development of a programming language named Ether that invoked procedural plans to process goals and assertions concurrently by dynamically creating new rules during program execution. Ether also addressed issues of conflict and contradiction with multiple sources of knowledge and multiple viewpoints. == Development == The scientific community metaphor builds on the philosophy, history and sociology of science. It was originally developed building on work in the philosophy of science by Karl Popper and Imre Lakatos. In particular, it initially made use of Lakatos' work on proofs and refutations. Subsequently, development has been influenced by the work of Geof Bowker, Michel Callon, Paul Feyerabend, Elihu M. Gerson, Bruno Latour, John Law, Karl Popper, Susan Leigh Star, Anselm Strauss, and Lucy Suchman. In particular Latour's Science in Action had great influence. In the book, Janus figures make paradoxical statements about scientific development. An important challenge for the scientific community metaphor is to reconcile these paradoxical statements. == Qualities of scientific research == Scientific research depends critically on monotonicity, concurrency, commutativity, and pluralism


id: scientific-community-metaphor-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_community_metaphor-1.md
category: reference
title: Scientific community metaphor
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_community_metaphor
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:31.470794+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: scientific-community-metaphor-20260505-0
summary:
== Emphasis on communities rather than individuals == Alan Turing was one of the first to attempt to more precisely characterize individual intelligence through the notion of his famous Turing Test. This paradigm was developed and deepened in the field of Artificial Intelligence. Allen Newell and Herbert A. Simon did pioneer work in analyzing the protocols of individual human problem solving behavior on puzzles. More recently Marvin Minsky has developed the idea that the mind of an individual human is composed of a society of agents in Society of Mind (see the analysis by Push Singh). The above research on individual human problem solving is complementary to the scientific community metaphor. == Current applications == Some developments in hardware and software technology for the Internet are being applied in light of the scientific community metaphor.Hewitt 2006 Legal concerns (e.g., HIPAA, Sarbanes-Oxley, "The Books and Records Rules" in SEC Rule 17a-3/4 and "Design Criteria Standard for Electronic Records Management Software Applications" in DOD 5015.2 in the U.S.) are leading organizations to store information monotonically forever. It has just now become less costly in many cases to store information on magnetic disk than on tape. With increasing storage capacity, sites can monotonically


id: the-selfish-gene-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-0.md
category: reference
title: The Selfish Gene
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:32.764248+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-selfish-gene-20260505-0
summary:
The Selfish Gene is a 1976 popular science book by Richard Dawkins that espouses the gene-centred view of evolution. It builds upon the thesis of George Christopher Williams's Adaptation and Natural Selection (1966) and W. D. Hamilton's work on kin selection. From the gene-centred view, it follows that the more genes two individuals share, the more sense it makes for them to co-operate. The book introduced the term meme for a unit of cultural evolution analogous to the gene. Memetics has become a subject in its own right in the years since. In popularising Hamilton's ideas, as well as making its own valuable contributions to the field, the book has also stimulated research on human inclusive fitness. The "selfish gene" is a metaphor for the gene-centred view of evolution. As such, the book is not about a particular gene that causes selfish behaviour; in fact, much of it is devoted to explaining the evolution of altruism. Dawkins says of the title that he "can readily see that it might give an inadequate impression of its contents" and in retrospect wishes he had taken Tom Maschler's advice and titled it The Immortal Gene. He laments that “Too many people read it


id: the-selfish-gene-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-1.md
category: reference
title: The Selfish Gene
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:32.764248+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-selfish-gene-20260505-0
summary:
9. Battle of the Sexes Dawkins discusses Darwin’s theory of sexual selection. Females can afford to be choosy in their mates, and select for attractive traits in males. Fisher's principle explains why a 50:50 ratio of males to females is evolutionarily stable. This is true even in an extreme case like the harem-keeping elephant seal, where 4% of the males get 88% of copulations. In that case, the strategy of having a female offspring is safe, as she will have a pup, but the strategy of having a male can bring a large return (dozens of pups), even though many males live out their lives as bachelors. 10. You Scratch My back, I’ll Ride on Yours Dawkins discusses reciprocal altruism. Amotz Zahavi's theory of honest signalling explains stotting as a selfish act that improves the springbok's chances of escaping from a predator by indicating how difficult the chase would be. Dawkins discusses why many species live in groups, achieving mutual benefits through mechanisms such as Hamilton's selfish herd model: each individual behaves selfishly but the result is herd behaviour. Altruism can evolve, as in the social insects such as ants and bees, where workers give up the right to reproduce


id: the-selfish-gene-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-2.md
category: reference
title: The Selfish Gene
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:32.764248+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-selfish-gene-20260505-0
summary:
=== Choice of words === A good deal of objection to The Selfish Gene stemmed from its failure to be always clear about "selection" and "replication". Dawkins says the gene is the fundamental unit of selection, and then points out that selection does not act directly upon the gene, but upon "vehicles" or '"extended phenotypes". Stephen Jay Gould took exception to calling the gene a 'unit of selection' because selection acted only upon phenotypes. Summarising the Dawkins-Gould difference of view, Sterelny says: Gould thinks gene differences do not cause evolutionary changes in populations, they register those changes. The word "cause" here is somewhat tricky: does a change in lottery rules (for example, inheriting a defective gene "responsible" for a disorder) "cause" differences in outcome that might or might not occur? It certainly alters the likelihood of events, but a concatenation of contingencies decides what actually occurs. Dawkins thinks the use of "cause" as a statistical weighting is acceptable in common usage. Like Gould, Gabriel Dover in criticising The Selfish Gene says: It is illegitimate to give 'powers' to genes, as Dawkins would have it, to control the outcome of selection...There are no genes for interactions, as such: rather, each unique


id: the-selfish-gene-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-3.md
category: reference
title: The Selfish Gene
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:32.764248+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-selfish-gene-20260505-0
summary:
== Awards and recognition == In July 2017 a poll to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Royal Society Science Book Prize listed The Selfish Gene as the most influential science book of all time. The Royal Institution conducted a poll to determine the best science book ever. The Selfish Gene made the shortlist, along with Tom Stoppard's Arcadia, Konrad Lorenz's King Solomon's Ring and, in first place, Primo Levi's The Periodic Table. Ian McEwan writes that it "stood at the beginning of a golden age of science writing. With a fine sense of literary tradition, the physicist Steven Weinberg, in his book Dreams of a Final Theory, revisited Huxley's lecture on chalk in order to make the case for reductionism. Steven Pinker's application of Darwinian thought to Chomskyan linguistics in The Language Instinct is one of the finest celebrations of language I know. Among many other indispensable 'classics', I would propose EO Wilson's The Diversity of Life on the ecological wonders of the Amazon rain forest, and on the teeming micro-organisms in a handful of soil; David Deutsch's masterly account of the Many Worlds theory in The Fabric of Reality; Jared Diamond's melding of history with biological thought in


id: sociobiology-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociobiology-0.md
category: reference
title: Sociobiology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociobiology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:34.173410+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: sociobiology-20260505-0
summary:
Sociobiology is a field of biology that aims to explain social behavior in terms of evolution. It draws from disciplines including psychology, ethology, anthropology, evolution, zoology, archaeology, and population genetics. Within the study of human societies, sociobiology is closely related to evolutionary anthropology, human behavioral ecology, evolutionary psychology, and sociology. Sociobiology investigates social behaviors such as mating patterns, territorial fights, pack hunting, and the hive society of social insects. It argues that just as selection pressure led to animals evolving useful ways of interacting with the natural environment, so also it led to the genetic evolution of advantageous social behavior. While the term "sociobiology" originated at least as early as the 1940s; the concept did not gain major recognition until the publication of E. O. Wilson's book Sociobiology: The New Synthesis in 1975. The field quickly became the subject of scientific controversy. Critics, led by Richard Lewontin and Stephen Jay Gould, argued that genes played a role in human behavior, but that traits such as aggressiveness could be explained by social environment rather than by biology. Sociobiologists responded by pointing to the complex relationship between nature and nurture. Among sociobiologists, the controversy between laying weight to different levels of selection


id: sociobiology-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociobiology-1.md
category: reference
title: Sociobiology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociobiology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:34.173410+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: sociobiology-20260505-0
summary:
Certain behavioral traits are inherited, Inherited behavioral traits have been honed by natural selection and were adaptive in the environment in which they evolved. Sociobiology uses Nikolaas Tinbergen's four questions to search for explanations of animal behavior. Two of these categories are at the species level; two, at the individual level. The species-level categories (often called "ultimate explanations") are the adaptive function that a behavior serves and the historical evolutionary process that resulted in this functionality. The individual-level categories (often called "proximate explanations") are the development of the individual and the proximate mechanism (such as brain anatomy and hormones). === In humans === Studies of human behavior genetics have found behavioral traits such as creativity, extroversion, aggressiveness, and IQ have high heritability. Researchers are careful to point out that heritability does not constrain the influence that environmental or cultural factors may have on these traits. Various theorists have argued that in some environments criminal behavior might be adaptive. The evolutionary neuroandrogenic (ENA) theory, by sociologist/criminologist Lee Ellis, posits that female sexual selection has led to increased competitive behavior among men, sometimes resulting in criminality. In another theory, Mark van Vugt argues that a history of intergroup conflict for resources between


id: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions-0.md
category: reference
title: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:35.467021+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-0
summary:
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is a 1962 book about the history of science by the philosopher Thomas S. Kuhn. Its publication was a landmark event in the history, philosophy, and sociology of science. Kuhn challenged the then prevailing view of progress in science in which scientific progress was viewed as "development-by-accumulation" of accepted facts and theories. Kuhn argued for an episodic model in which periods of conceptual continuity and cumulative progress, referred to as periods of "normal science", were interrupted by periods of revolutionary science. The discovery of "anomalies" accumulating and precipitating revolutions in science leads to new paradigms. New paradigms then ask new questions of old data, move beyond the mere "puzzle-solving" of the previous paradigm, alter the rules of the game and change the "map" directing new research. For example, Kuhn's analysis of the Copernican Revolution emphasized that, in its beginning, it did not offer more accurate predictions of celestial events, such as planetary positions, than the Ptolemaic system, but instead appealed to some practitioners based on a promise of better, simpler solutions that might be developed at some point in the future. Kuhn called the core concepts of an ascendant revolution its "paradigms" and thereby launched


id: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions-1.md
category: reference
title: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:35.467021+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-0
summary:
"The operations and measurements that a scientist undertakes in the laboratory are not "the given" of experience but rather "the collected with difficulty". They are not what the scientist sees—at least not before his research is well advanced and his attention focused. Rather, they are concrete indices to the content of more elementary perceptions, and as such they are selected for the close scrutiny of normal research only because they promise opportunity for the fruitful elaboration of an accepted paradigm. Far more clearly than the immediate experience from which they in part derive, operations and measurements are paradigm-determined. Science does not deal in all possible laboratory manipulations. Instead, it selects those relevant to the juxtaposition of a paradigm with the immediate experience that that paradigm has partially determined. As a result, scientists with different paradigms engage in different concrete laboratory manipulations." === Historical examples of chemistry === Kuhn explains his ideas using examples taken from the history of science. For instance, eighteenth-century scientists believed that homogenous solutions were chemical compounds. Therefore, a combination of water and alcohol was generally classified as a compound. Nowadays it is considered to be a solution, but there was no reason then to suspect that


id: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions-2.md
category: reference
title: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:35.467021+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-0
summary:
A famous example of a revolution in scientific thought is the Copernican Revolution. In Ptolemy's school of thought, cycles and epicycles (with some additional concepts) were used for modeling the movements of the planets in a cosmos that had a stationary Earth at its center. As accuracy of celestial observations increased, complexity of the Ptolemaic cyclical and epicyclical mechanisms had to increase to maintain the calculated planetary positions close to the observed positions. Copernicus proposed a cosmology in which the Sun was at the center and the Earth was one of the planets revolving around it. For modeling the planetary motions, Copernicus used the tools he was familiar with, namely the cycles and epicycles of the Ptolemaic toolbox. Yet Copernicus' model needed more cycles and epicycles than existed in the then-current Ptolemaic model, and due to a lack of accuracy in calculations, his model did not appear to provide more accurate predictions than the Ptolemy model. Copernicus' contemporaries rejected his cosmology, and Kuhn asserts that they were quite right to do so: Copernicus' cosmology lacked credibility. Kuhn illustrates how a paradigm shift later became possible when Galileo Galilei introduced his new ideas concerning motion. Intuitively, when an object is set


id: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions-3.md
category: reference
title: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:35.467021+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-0
summary:
=== Coherence === One of the aims of science is to find models that will account for as many observations as possible within a coherent framework. Together, Galileo's rethinking of the nature of motion and Keplerian cosmology represented a coherent framework that was capable of rivaling the Aristotelian/Ptolemaic framework. Once a paradigm shift has taken place, the textbooks are rewritten. Often the history of science too is rewritten, being presented as an inevitable process leading up to the current, established framework of thought. There is a prevalent belief that all hitherto-unexplained phenomena will in due course be accounted for in terms of this established framework. Kuhn states that scientists spend most (if not all) of their careers in a process of puzzle-solving. Their puzzle-solving is pursued with great tenacity, because the previous successes of the established paradigm tend to generate great confidence that the approach being taken guarantees that a solution to the puzzle exists, even though it may be very hard to find. Kuhn calls this process normal science. As a paradigm is stretched to its limits, anomalies – failures of the current paradigm to take into account observed phenomena – accumulate. Their significance is judged by the practitioners


id: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions-4.md
category: reference
title: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:35.467021+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-0
summary:
=== Incommensurability === According to Kuhn, the scientific paradigms preceding and succeeding a paradigm shift are so different that their theories are incommensurable—the new paradigm cannot be proven or disproven by the rules of the old paradigm, and vice versa. A later interpretation by Kuhn of "commensurable" versus "incommensurable" was as a distinction between "languages", namely, that statements in commensurable languages were translatable fully from one to the other, while in incommensurable languages, strict translation is not possible. The paradigm shift does not merely involve the revision or transformation of an individual theory, it changes the way terminology is defined, how the scientists in that field view their subject, and, perhaps most significantly, what questions are regarded as valid, and what rules are used to determine the truth of a particular theory. The new theories were not, as the scientists had previously thought, just extensions of old theories, but were instead completely new world views. Such incommensurability exists not just before and after a paradigm shift, but in the periods in between conflicting paradigms. It is simply not possible, according to Kuhn, to construct an impartial language that can be used to perform a neutral comparison between conflicting paradigms, because


id: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-5
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions-5.md
category: reference
title: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:35.467021+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-0
summary:
"First, the new candidate must seem to resolve some outstanding and generally recognized problem that can be met in no other way. Second, the new paradigm must promise to preserve a relatively large part of the concrete problem-solving ability that has accrued to science through its predecessors. Novelty for its own sake is not a desideratum in the sciences as it is in so many other creative fields. As a result, though new paradigms seldom or never possess all the capabilities of their predecessors, they usually preserve a great deal of the most concrete parts of past achievement and they always permit additional concrete problem-solutions besides." In the second edition, Kuhn added a postscript in which he elaborated his ideas on the nature of scientific progress. He described a thought experiment involving an observer who has the opportunity to inspect an assortment of theories, each corresponding to a single stage in a succession of theories. What if the observer is presented with these theories without any explicit indication of their chronological order? Kuhn anticipates that it will be possible to reconstruct their chronology on the basis of the theories' scope and content, because the more recent a theory is, the


id: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-6
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions-6.md
category: reference
title: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:35.467021+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-0
summary:
=== Political science === In 1974, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions was ranked as the second most frequently used book in political science courses focused on scope and methods. In particular, Kuhn's theory has been used by political scientists to critique behavioralism, which claims that accurate political statements must be both testable and falsifiable. The book also proved popular with political scientists embroiled in debates about whether a set of formulations put forth by a political scientist constituted a theory, or something else. The changes that occur in politics, society and business are often expressed in Kuhnian terms, however poor their parallel with the practice of science may seem to scientists and historians of science. The terms "paradigm" and "paradigm shift" have become such notorious clichés and buzzwords that they are sometimes viewed as effectively devoid of content. == Criticisms == The Structure of Scientific Revolutions was soon criticized by Kuhn's colleagues in the history and philosophy of science. In 1965, a special symposium on the book was held at an International Colloquium on the Philosophy of Science that took place at Bedford College, London, and was chaired by Karl Popper. The symposium led to the publication of the symposium's


id: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-7
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions-7.md
category: reference
title: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:35.467021+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-0
summary:
Relativistic mass: the mass of a particle is equal to the total energy of the particle divided by the speed of light squared. Since the total energy of a particle in relation to one system of reference differs from the total energy in relation to other systems of reference, while the speed of light remains constant in all systems, it follows that the mass of a particle has different values in different systems of reference. "Real" mass: the mass of a particle is equal to the non-kinetic energy of a particle divided by the speed of light squared. Since non-kinetic energy is the same in all systems of reference, and the same is true of light, it follows that the mass of a particle has the same value in all systems of reference. Projecting this distinction backwards in time onto Newtonian dynamics, we can formulate the following two hypotheses: HR: the term "mass" in Newtonian theory denotes relativistic mass. Hp: the term "mass" in Newtonian theory denotes "real" mass. According to Field, it is impossible to decide which of these two affirmations is true. Prior to the theory of relativity, the term "mass" was referentially indeterminate. But this does not


id: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-8
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions-8.md
category: reference
title: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:35.467021+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-20260505-0
summary:
== Bibliography == Barnes, Barry (1982). T. S. Kuhn and Social Science. New York City: Columbia University Press. ISBN 9780231054362. Bilton, Tony; et al. (2002). Introductory Sociology (4th ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 422. ISBN 978-0-333-94571-1.* Bird, Alexander (2013). "Thomas Kuhn". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved September 23, 2017. Bird, Alexander; Ladyman, James (2013). Arguing about Science. Routledge. ISBN 9780415492294. Retrieved September 23, 2017. Blanchard, Olivier J. (2009). "The State of Macro". Annual Review of Economics. 1 (1): 209–228. doi:10.3386/w14259. Conant, James; Haugeland, John (2002). "Editors' introduction". The Road Since Structure: Philosophical Essays, 1970-1993, with an Autobiographical Interview (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. p. 4. ISBN 978-0226457994. Daston, Lorraine (2012). "Structure". Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences. 42 (5): 496–499. doi:10.1525/hsns.2012.42.5.496. JSTOR 10.1525/hsns.2012.42.5.496. Davidson, Donald (1973). "On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme". Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association. 47: 5–20. doi:10.2307/3129898. JSTOR 3129898. de Gelder, Beatrice (1989). "Granny, The Naked Emperor and the Second Cognitive Revolution". The Cognitive Turn: Sociological and Psychological Perspectives on Science. Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook. Vol. 13. Springer Netherlands. pp. 97–100. ISBN 978-0-7923-0306-0. Dolby, R. G. A. (1971). "Reviewed Work: Criticism and the


id: technoscience-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technoscience-0.md
category: reference
title: Technoscience
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technoscience
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:36.687987+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: technoscience-20260505-0
summary:
In common usage, technoscience refers to the entire long-standing and global human activity of technology, combined with the relatively recent scientific method that occurred primarily in Europe during the 17th and 18th centuries. Technoscience is the study of how humans interact with technology using the scientific method. Technoscience thus comprises the history of human application of technology and modern scientific methods, ranging from the early development of basic technologies for hunting, agriculture, or husbandry (e.g. the well, the bow, the plow, the harness) and all the way through atomic applications, biotechnology, robotics, and computer sciences. This more common and comprehensive usage of the term technoscience can be found in general textbooks and lectures concerning the history of science. The relationship with the history of science is important in this subject and also underestimated, for example, by more modern sociologists of science. Instead, it is worth emphasizing the links that exist between books on the history of science and technology and the study of the relationship between science and technology within a framework of social developments. The generational leap between historical periods and scientific discoveries, the construction of machines, and the creation of tools in relation to the technological changes that


id: technoscience-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technoscience-1.md
category: reference
title: Technoscience
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technoscience
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:36.687987+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: technoscience-20260505-0
summary:
=== Political === Science and technology are tools that continually change social structures and behaviors. Technoscience can be viewed as a form of government or having the power of government because of its impact on society. The impact extends to public health, safety, the environment, and beyond. Innovations create fundamental changes and drastically change the way people live. For example, C-SPAN and social media give American voters a near real-time view of Congress. This has allowed journalists and the people to hold their elected officials accountable in new ways. === Environmental === Chlorine chemists and their scientific knowledge helped set the agenda for many environmental problems: PCBs in the Hudson River are polychlorinated biphenols; DDT, dieldrin, and aldrin are chlorinated pesticides; CFCs that deplete the ozone layer are chlorofluorocarbons. Industry actually manufactured the chemicals and consumers purchased them. Therefore, one can determine that chemists are not the sole cause for these issues, but they are not blameless. == See also == Bernard Stiegler Feminist technoscience Technocriticism Technoethics == Notes == == References == Steven Lukes, Power (1974), A Radical View, London: Macmillan Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar (1979). Laboratory Life: the Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton University Press. ISBN


id: the-third-culture-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Culture-0.md
category: reference
title: The Third Culture
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Culture
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:37.926935+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-third-culture-20260505-0
summary:
The Third Culture: Beyond the Scientific Revolution is a 1995 book by John Brockman which discusses the work of several well-known scientists who are directly communicating their new, sometimes provocative, ideas to the general public. John Brockman has continued the themes of 'The Third Culture' in the website of the Edge Foundation, where leading scientists and thinkers contribute their thoughts in plain English. The title of the book refers to C. P. Snow's 1959 work The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution, which described the conflict between the cultures of the humanities and science. == Contents == Contributions by twenty-three authors were included in the 1995 book: physicist Paul Davies biologist Richard Dawkins philosopher Daniel Dennett paleontologist Niles Eldredge chaos theorist J. Doyne Farmer theoretical physicist Murray Gell-Mann biologist Brian Goodwin geologist/biologist Stephen Jay Gould physicist Alan Guth inventor W. Daniel Hillis theoretical psychologist Nicholas Humphrey geneticist Steve Jones biologist Stuart Kauffman complex systems specialist Christopher Langton biologist Lynn Margulis mathematician and computer scientist Marvin Minsky mathematical physicist Roger Penrose cognitive scientist Steven Pinker theoretical astrophysicist Martin Rees cognitive scientist Roger Schank theoretical physicist Lee Smolin biologist Francisco Varela evolutionary biologist George C. Williams The book influenced the reception of


id: tree-of-knowledge-system-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_knowledge_system-0.md
category: reference
title: Tree of knowledge system
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_knowledge_system
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:39.150258+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: tree-of-knowledge-system-20260505-0
summary:
The tree of knowledge (ToK) system is a new map of Big History that traces cosmic evolution across four different planes of existence, identified as Matter, Life, Mind and Culture that are mapped respectively by the physical, biological, psychological and social domains of science. The Tree of Knowledge (ToK) System was developed by Gregg Henriques, who is a professor and core faculty member in the Combined-Integrated Doctoral Program in Clinical and School Psychology at James Madison University. The ToK System is part of a larger Unified Theory of Knowledge that Henriques describes as a consilient scientific humanistic philosophy for the 21st Century. The official Unified Theory of Knowledge website describes the ToK System as: [A] theory of scientific knowledge that defines the human knower in relation to the known. It achieves this novel accomplishment by solving the problem of psychology and giving rise to a truly consilient view of the scientific landscape. It accomplishes this via dividing the evolution of behavioral complexity into four different planes of existence...The ToK also characterizes modern empirical natural science as a kind of justification system that functions to map complexity and change. The outline of the ToK System was first published in 2003 in


id: tree-of-knowledge-system-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_knowledge_system-1.md
category: reference
title: Tree of knowledge system
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_knowledge_system
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:39.150258+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: tree-of-knowledge-system-20260505-0
summary:
=== Mind/Animal — (Basic) psychological sciences === Mind/cognition in the ToK system refers to the set of mental behaviors. Mental behaviors are behaviors of animals mediated by the nervous system that produce a functional effect on the animal-environment relationship. As such, Mind/cognition is essentially synonymous with what behavioral psychologists have meant when they use the term behavior. Thus, a fly avoiding a fly swatter, a rat pushing a bar or a human getting a drink of water are all mental behaviors. Mind is not synonymous with sentience or the capacity for mental experience, although such processes are presumed to emerge in the mental/cognitive dimension. Cognition, in the broad sense of the term is meaning bodily-neuro-social information processing, as in EEEE Cognition: Embodied, Embedded, Enactive, Extended. While cognitive science stands for naturalist study of mind, psychology is an approach grounded in the tradition of humanities, especially philosophy. Thus, by defining mind as mental behavior, Henriques argues that the ToK System provides a way to bridge the epistemological differences between cognitive and behavioral science. Henriques argues that comparative psychology, ethology, and (animal) cognitive behavioral neuroscience should all be thought of as parts of the discipline that maps the animal-mental domain. === Culture/Person


id: tree-of-knowledge-system-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_knowledge_system-2.md
category: reference
title: Tree of knowledge system
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_knowledge_system
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:39.150258+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: tree-of-knowledge-system-20260505-0
summary:
== The "problem of psychology" == The ToK System emerged as a consequence of Henriques wrestling with what he calls "the problem of psychology". Henriques argues that the most difficult problem in psychology as a discipline is that while there is incredible diversity offered by different approaches to psychology, and there is no consensus model of what psychology actually is. Specifically, Henriques argues that the field lacks a clear definition, an agreed upon subject matter, and a coherent conceptual framework. The problem has been long standing, identified as the "crisis" by Lev Vygotsky in the mid 1920s. Henriques further argues that the patent tendency of psychology has been toward theoretical and substantial fragmentation and increasing insularity among the "specialties." In other words, the discipline has fragmented into different schools of thought and methodology, with no overall framework to interpret and integrate the research of different areas. At its best, the different approaches are a strength of psychology; different approaches lead to novel ideas, and prevent psychologists from clinging to a paradigm that fails to explain a phenomenon. At its worst, adherents of one particular school cling to their beliefs concerning the relative importance of their research and disregard or are


id: tree-of-knowledge-system-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_knowledge_system-3.md
category: reference
title: Tree of knowledge system
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_knowledge_system
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:39.150258+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: tree-of-knowledge-system-20260505-0
summary:
(1) psychological formalism and (2) human psychology. Psychological formalism is defined as the science of mind and corresponds to the behavior of animal objects. Human psychology is considered to be a unique subset of psychological formalism that deals with human behavior at the level of the individual. Because human behavior is immersed in the larger socio-cultural context (level four in the ToK System), human psychology is considered a hybrid discipline that merges the pure science of psychology with the social sciences. It is important to point out that there are other disciplines the ToK System would classify as “hybrids.” Molecular genetics, for example, is a hybrid between chemistry and biology and neuroscience is a hybrid between biology and psychology. As with Henriques' proposed conception of human psychology, both of these disciplines adopt an object level perspective (molecular and cellular, respectively) on phenomena that simultaneously exist as part of meta-level system processes (life and mind, respectively). Though David A. F. Haaga "congratulate[d] Dr. Henriques' ambitious, scholarly, provocative paper", and "found the Tree of Knowledge taxonomy, the theoretical joint points, the evolutionary history, and the levels of emergent properties highly illuminating", he asks the rhetorical questions, If it is so difficult to


id: tree-of-knowledge-system-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_knowledge_system-4.md
category: reference
title: Tree of knowledge system
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_knowledge_system
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:39.150258+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: tree-of-knowledge-system-20260505-0
summary:
== Toward the integration of human knowledge == As stated above, the ToK System proposes a new epistemology with the goal of moving academic knowledge toward what E.O. Wilson termed consilience. Consilience is the interlocking of fact and theory into a coherent, holistic view of knowledge. Henriques argues that the ToK affords new perspectives on how knowledge is obtained because it depicts how science emerges from culture and that the four dimensions of complexity correspond to four broad classes of science: the physical, biological, psychological and social sciences. Henriques further argues that developing such a system for integrating knowledge is not just an academic enterprise. He suggests that in an increasingly complex world, the fragmented state of knowledge can be seen as one of the most pressing social problems of our time. Henriques also believes that history seems to attest that the absence of a collective worldview ostensibly condemns humanity to an endless series of conflicts that inevitably stem from incompatible, partially correct, locally situated justification systems. Thus, from Henriques' perspective, there are good reasons for believing that if there was a shared, general background of explanation, humanity might be able to achieve much greater levels of harmonious relations. In


id: the-two-cultures-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Cultures-0.md
category: reference
title: The Two Cultures
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Cultures
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:40.468298+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-two-cultures-20260505-0
summary:
"The Two Cultures" is the first part of an influential 1959 Rede Lecture by British scientist and novelist C. P. Snow. The lecture was published that same year in book form as The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. Snow's thesis was that science and the humanities, which represented "the intellectual life of the whole of western society", had become divided into "two cultures", and that the growing division between them was a major handicap in solving the world's problems. == The lecture == The talk was delivered 7 May 1959 in the Senate House, Cambridge, and subsequently published as The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. The lecture and book expanded upon an article by Snow published in the New Statesman of 6 October 1956, also titled "The Two Cultures". The book form of Snow's lecture was widely read and discussed on both sides of the Atlantic, leading him to write a 1963 follow-up, The Two Cultures: And a Second Look: An Expanded Version of the Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. Snow's position can be summed up by an oft-repeated passage from his lecture: A good many times I have been present at gatherings of people who, by


id: the-two-cultures-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Cultures-1.md
category: reference
title: The Two Cultures
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Cultures
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:40.468298+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-two-cultures-20260505-0
summary:
== Antecedents == Contrasting scientific and humanistic knowledge is a repetition of the Methodenstreit of 1890 German universities. A quarrel in 1911 between Benedetto Croce and Giovanni Gentile on the one hand and Federigo Enriques on the other one is believed to have had enduring effects in the separation of the two cultures in Italy and to the predominance of the views of (objective) idealism over those of (logical) positivism. In the social sciences it is also commonly proposed as the quarrel of positivism versus interpretivism. == See also == Culture war The Third Culture Science wars Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge, a 1998 book written by biologist Edward Osborne Wilson, as an attempt to bridge the gap between "the two cultures" Quarrel of the Ancients and the Moderns Interdisciplinarity, a movement to cross boundaries between academic disciplines, including the divide between "the two cultures" == References == == Further reading == Burguete, Maria, and Lam, Lui, eds. (2008). Science Matters: Humanities as Complex Systems. World Scientific: Singapore. ISBN 978-981-283-593-2 James, Frank A. J. L. (29 November 2016). "Introduction: Some Significances of the Two Cultures Debate" (PDF). Interdisciplinary Science Reviews. 41 (2–3): 107–117. Bibcode:2016ISRv...41..107J. doi:10.1080/03080188.2016.1223651. Sinclair, Andrew (1987). The Red


id: unified-science-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Science-0.md
category: reference
title: Unified Science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:41.633002+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: unified-science-20260505-0
summary:
"Unified Science" can refer to any of three related strands in contemporary thought. Belief in the unity of science was a central tenet of logical positivism. Different logical positivists construed this doctrine in several different ways, e.g. as a reductionist thesis, that the objects investigated by the special sciences reduce to the objects of a common, putatively more basic domain of science, usually thought to be physics; as the thesis that all of the theories and results of the various sciences can or ought to be expressed in a common language or "universal slang"; or as the thesis that all the special sciences share a common method. The writings of Edward Haskell and a few associates, seeking to rework science into a single discipline employing a common artificial language. This work culminated in the 1972 publication of Full Circle: The Moral Force of Unified Science. The vast part of the work of Haskell and his contemporaries remains unpublished, however. Timothy Wilken and Anthony Judge have recently revived and extended the insights of Haskell and his coworkers. Unified Science has been a consistent thread since the 1940s in Howard T. Odum's systems ecology and the associated Emergy Synthesis, modeling the "ecosystem":


id: unity-of-science-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_of_science-0.md
category: reference
title: Unity of science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_of_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:42.836667+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: unity-of-science-20260505-0
summary:
The unity of science is a thesis in philosophy of science that says that all the sciences form a unified whole. The variants of the thesis can be classified as ontological (giving a unified account of the structure of reality) and/or as epistemic/pragmatic (giving a unified account of how the activities and products of science work). There are also philosophers who emphasize the disunity of science, which does not necessarily imply that there could be no unity in some sense but does emphasize pluralism in the ontology and/or practice of science. Early versions of the unity of science thesis can be found in ancient Greek philosophers such as Aristotle, and in the later history of Western philosophy. For example, in the first half of the 20th century the thesis was associated with the unity of science movement led by Otto Neurath, and in the second half of the century the thesis was advocated by Ludwig von Bertalanffy in "General System Theory: A New Approach to Unity of Science" (1951) and by Paul Oppenheim and Hilary Putnam in "Unity of Science as a Working Hypothesis" (1958). It has been opposed by, for example, Jerry Fodor in "Special Sciences (Or: The Disunity


id: unweaving-the-rainbow-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unweaving_the_Rainbow-0.md
category: reference
title: Unweaving the Rainbow
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unweaving_the_Rainbow
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:44.179509+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: unweaving-the-rainbow-20260505-0
summary:
Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder is a 1998 book by the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, in which the author discusses the relationship between science and the arts from the perspective of a scientist. Dawkins addresses the misperception that science and art are at odds. Driven by the responses to his books The Selfish Gene and The Blind Watchmaker wherein readers resented his naturalistic world view, seeing it as depriving life of meaning, Dawkins felt the need to explain that, as a scientist, he saw the world as full of wonders and a source of pleasure. This pleasure was not in spite of, but rather because he does not assume as cause the inexplicable actions of a deity but rather the understandable laws of nature. His starting point is John Keats's well-known, light-hearted accusation that Isaac Newton destroyed the poetry of the rainbow by 'reducing it to the prismatic colours.' See Keats's poem Lamia and Edgar Allan Poe's To Science. Dawkins's agenda is to show the reader that science does not destroy, but rather discovers poetry in the patterns of nature. == Summary == === Preface === It is of little concern whether or not science


id: unweaving-the-rainbow-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unweaving_the_Rainbow-1.md
category: reference
title: Unweaving the Rainbow
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unweaving_the_Rainbow
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:44.179509+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: unweaving-the-rainbow-20260505-0
summary:
=== Huge cloudy symbols of a high romance === Unlike "magisterial poetry" (where metaphors and pretty language are used to describe the familiar), "pupillary poetry" uses poetic imagery to assist a scientist's thinking about the exotic (e.g. consider "being" an electron temporarily). Although it is useful, some authors take pupillary poetry too far, and, "drunk on metaphor", they produce "bad science"; i.e. postulate faulty theories. This is powered by humanity's natural tendency to look for representations. === The selfish cooperator === Genes compete with each other, but this occurs within the context of collaboration, as is shown with examples involving mitochondria, bacteria, and termites. Two types of collaboration are co-adaptation (tailoring simultaneously the different parts of an organism, such as flower colour and flower markings), and co-evolution (two species changing together; e.g. predator and prey running speeds may increase together in a sort of arms race). === The Genetic Book of the Dead === The body of any organism provides clues about its habitat. The genes allow one to reconstruct a picture of the range of ways of life that the species has experienced; in this sense DNA would act as a palimpsestic "digital archive" if only its language of


id: unweaving-the-rainbow-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unweaving_the_Rainbow-2.md
category: reference
title: Unweaving the Rainbow
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unweaving_the_Rainbow
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:44.179509+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: unweaving-the-rainbow-20260505-0
summary:
Video interview with Dawkins about the book, Charlie Rose, 11 April 2000] Dawkins's Rainbow Reduces Science to Truth, Beauty—and Fantasy – reviewed by Robert N. Proctor, American Scientist. Richard Dawkins: The man who knows the meaning of life Archived 31 August 2009 at the Wayback Machine review from The Guardian. How, Why and Wow! Archived 1 January 2009 at the Wayback Machine – reviewed by Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy, The Spectator. There is Poetry in Science – reviewed by Melvyn Bragg, The Observer. Everyone a Scientist Archived 7 July 2009 at the Wayback Machine – reviewed by John Gribbin, The Literary Review. The Poetry of Science – reviewed by Sam Hurwitt, The San Francisco Examiner. The Science of Selfishness – reviewed by Andrew Brown, Salon. Nature of Science: A Wondrous and Poetic Spectrum Archived 1 January 2009 at the Wayback Machine reviewed by Charles M. Vest, Science. Frauds! Fakes! Phonies! – reviewed by Timothy Ferris, The New York Times. Unweaving the Rainbow Archived 24 June 2009 at the Wayback Machine reviewed by Paul R. Gross, The Wall Street Journal. Finding Awe, Reverence, and Wonder in Science – reviewed by Kendrick Frazier, Skeptical Inquirer. Unweaving the Rainbow – review from The Complete Review.


id: vienna-circle-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Circle-0.md
category: reference
title: Vienna Circle
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Circle
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:45.384376+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: vienna-circle-20260505-0
summary:
The Vienna Circle (German: Wiener Kreis) of logical empiricism was a group of philosophers and scientists drawn from the natural and social sciences, logic and mathematics who met regularly from 1924 to 1936 at the University of Vienna, chaired by Moritz Schlick. The Vienna Circle had an influence on 20th-century philosophy, especially philosophy of science and analytic philosophy. The philosophical position of the Vienna Circle was called logical empiricism (German: logischer Empirismus), logical positivism or neopositivism. It was influenced by Ernst Mach, David Hilbert, French conventionalism (Henri Poincaré and Pierre Duhem), Gottlob Frege, Bertrand Russell, Ludwig Wittgenstein and Albert Einstein. The Vienna Circle was pluralistic and committed to the ideals of the Enlightenment. It was unified by the aim of making philosophy scientific with the help of modern logic. Main topics were foundational debates in the natural and social sciences, logic and mathematics; the modernization of empiricism by modern logic; the search for an empiricist criterion of meaning; the critique of metaphysics and the unification of the sciences in the unity of science. The Vienna Circle appeared in public with the publication of various book series – Schriften zur wissenschaftlichen Weltauffassung (Monographs on the Scientific World-Conception), Einheitswissenschaft (Unified Science) and


id: vienna-circle-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Circle-1.md
category: reference
title: Vienna Circle
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Circle
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:45.384376+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: vienna-circle-20260505-0
summary:
=== Public phase – Schlick Circle and Verein Ernst Mach (1928–1934) === In 1928 the Verein Ernst Mach (Ernst Mach Society) was founded, with Schlick as its chairman. The aim of the society was the spreading of a "scientific world conception" through public lectures that were in large part held by members of the Vienna Circle. In 1929 the Vienna Circle made its first public appearance under this name – invented by Neurath – with the publication of its manifesto Wissenschaftliche Weltauffassung. Der Wiener Kreis (The Scientific Conception of the World. The Vienna Circle also known as Viewing the World Scientifically: The Vienna Circle) The pamphlet is dedicated to Schlick, and its preface was signed by Hahn, Neurath and Carnap. The manifesto was presented at the Tagung für Erkenntnislehre der exakten Wissenschaften (Conference on the Epistemology of the Exact Sciences) in autumn 1929, organized by the Vienna Circle together with the Berlin Circle. This conference was the first international appearance of logical empiricism (Neurath coined the term in 1931 in his article "Physikalismus") and the first of a number of conferences: Königsberg (1930), Prague (1934), Paris (1935), Copenhague (1936), Cambridge, UK (1938), Cambridge, Mass. (1939), and Chicago (1941). While primarily


id: vienna-circle-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Circle-2.md
category: reference
title: Vienna Circle
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Circle
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:45.384376+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: vienna-circle-20260505-0
summary:
== Congresses and publications == The Vienna Circle was very active in advertising their new philosophical ideas. Several congresses on epistemology and philosophy of science were organized, with the help of the Berlin Circle. There were some preparatory congresses: Prague (1929), Königsberg (1930), Prague (1934) and then the first congress on scientific philosophy held in Paris (1935), followed by congresses in Copenhagen (1936), Paris (1937), Cambridge, UK (1938), Cambridge, Massachusetts. (1939). The Königsberg congress (1930) was very important, for Kurt Gödel announced that he had proven the completeness of first-order logic and the incompleteness of formal arithmetic. Another very interesting congress was the one held in Copenhagen (1936), which was dedicated to quantum physics and causality. Between 1928 and 1937, the Vienna Circle published ten books in a collection named Schriften zur wissenschaftlichen Weltauffassung (Monographs on the Scientific World-Conception), edited by Schlick and Frank. Karl Raimund Popper's book Logik der Forschung was published in this collection. Seven works were published in another collection, called Einheitswissenschaft (Unified Science). In 1930 Rudolf Carnap and Hans Reichenbach undertook the editorship of the journal Erkenntnis, which was published between 1930 and 1940 (from 1939 the editors were Otto Neurath, Rudolf Carnap and Charles Morris).


id: vienna-circle-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Circle-3.md
category: reference
title: Vienna Circle
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Circle
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:45.384376+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: vienna-circle-20260505-0
summary:
=== The Manifesto (1929) === This states the scientific world-conception of the Vienna Circle, which is characterized "essentially by two features. First it is empiricist and positivist: there is knowledge only from experience. Second, the scientific world-conception is marked by the application of a certain method, namely logical analysis." Logical analysis is the method of clarification of philosophical problems; it makes an extensive use of symbolic logic and distinguishes the Vienna Circle empiricism from earlier versions. The task of philosophy lies in the clarification—through the method of logical analysis—of problems and assertions. Logical analysis shows that there are two different kinds of statements; one kind includes statements reducible to simpler statements about the empirically given; the other kind includes statements which cannot be reduced to statements about experience and thus they are devoid of meaning. Metaphysical statements belong to this second kind and therefore they are meaningless. Hence many philosophical problems are rejected as pseudo-problems which arise from logical mistakes, while others are re-interpreted as empirical statements and thus become the subject of scientific inquiries. One source of the logical mistakes that are at the origins of metaphysics is the ambiguity of natural language. "Ordinary language for instance uses the


id: vienna-circle-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Circle-4.md
category: reference
title: Vienna Circle
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Circle
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:45.384376+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: vienna-circle-20260505-0
summary:
=== Critique of metaphysics === The attitude of Vienna Circle towards metaphysics is well expressed by Carnap in the article 'Überwindung der Metaphysik durch Logische Analyse der Sprache' in Erkenntnis, vol. 2, 1932 (English translation 'The Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language' in Sarkar, Sahotra, ed., Logical empiricism at its peak: Schlick, Carnap, and Neurath, New York : Garland Pub., 1996, pp. 10–31). A language—says Carnap—consists of a vocabulary, i.e., a set of meaningful words, and a syntax, i.e., a set of rules governing the formation of sentences from the words of the vocabulary. Pseudo-statements, i.e., sequences of words that at first sight resemble statements but in reality have no meaning, are formed in two ways: either meaningless words occur in them, or they are formed in an invalid syntactical way. According to Carnap, pseudo-statements of both kinds occur in metaphysics. A word W has a meaning if two conditions are satisfied. First, the mode of the occurrence of W in its elementary sentence form (i.e., the simplest sentence form in which W is capable of occurring) must be fixed. Secondly, if W occurs in an elementary sentence S, it is necessary to give an answer to the


id: vienna-circle-20260505-5
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Circle-5.md
category: reference
title: Vienna Circle
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Circle
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:45.384376+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: vienna-circle-20260505-0
summary:
What sentences is S deducible from, and what sentences are deducible from S? Under what conditions is S supposed to be true, and under what conditions false? How is S verified? What is the meaning of S? (Carnap, "The Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language" in Sarkar, Sahotra 1996, p. 12) An example offered by Carnap concerns the word 'arthropod'. The sentence form "the thing x is an arthropod" is an elementary sentence form that is derivable from "x is an animal", "x has a segmented body" and "x has jointed legs". Conversely, these sentences are derivable from "the thing x is an arthropod". Thus the meaning of the word 'arthropod' is determined. According to Carnap, many words of metaphysics do not fulfill these requirements and thus they are meaningless. As an example, Carnap considers the word 'principle'. This word has a definite meaning, if the sentence "x is the principle of y" is supposed to be equivalent to the sentence "y exists by virtue of x" or "y arises out of x". The latter sentence is perfectly clear: y arises out of x when x is invariably followed by y, and the invariable association between x and


id: science-journalism-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_journalism-0.md
category: reference
title: Science journalism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_journalism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:47.224072+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-journalism-20260505-0
summary:
Science journalism conveys reporting about science to the public. The field typically involves interactions between scientists, journalists and the public. There are many different examples of science writing. A few examples include feature writing, risk communication, blogs, science books, scientific journals, science podcasts and science magazines. == Origins == Modern science journalism originated in weather and other natural history observations, as well as reports of new scientific findings, reported by almanacs and other news writing in the centuries following the advent of the printing press. One early example dates back to Digdarshan (means showing the direction), which was an educational monthly magazine that started publication in 1818 from Srirampore, Bengal, India. Digdarshan carried articles on different aspects of science, such as plants, steam boat, etc. It was available in Bengali, Hindi and English languages. In the U.S., Scientific American was founded in 1845, in another early example. One of the occasions an article was attributed to a 'scientific correspondent' was "A Gale in the Bay of Biscay" by William Crookes which appeared in The Times on 18 January 1871, page 7. Thomas Henry Huxley (1825–1895) and John Tyndall (1820–1893) were scientists who were greatly involved in journalism and Peter Chalmers


id: science-journalism-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_journalism-1.md
category: reference
title: Science journalism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_journalism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:47.224072+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-journalism-20260505-0
summary:
== Status == With budget cuts at major newspapers and other media, there are fewer working science journalists employed by traditional print and broadcast media than before. Similarly, there are currently very few journalists in traditional media outlets that write multiple articles on emerging science, such as nanotechnology. In 2011, there were 459 journalists who had written a newspaper article covering nanotechnology, of whom 7 wrote about the topic more than 25 times. In January 2012, just a week after The Daily Climate reported that worldwide coverage of climate change continued a three-year slide in 2012 and that among the five largest US dailies, the New York Times published the most stories and had the biggest increase in coverage, that newspaper announced that it was dismantling its environmental desk and merging its journalists with other departments. News coverage on science by traditional media outlets, such as newspapers, magazines, radio and news broadcasts is being replaced by online sources. In April 2012, the New York Times was awarded two Pulitzer Prizes for content published by Politico and The Huffington Post (now HuffPost) both online sources, a sign of the platform shift by the media outlet. Science information continues to be widely


id: science-journalism-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_journalism-2.md
category: reference
title: Science journalism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_journalism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:47.224072+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-journalism-20260505-0
summary:
The content of news stories regarding climate change are affected by journalistic norms including balance, impartiality, neutrality and objectivity. Balanced reporting, which involves giving equal time to opposing sides of a debate over has had a harmful impact on the media coverage of climate science.


id: science-journalism-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_journalism-3.md
category: reference
title: Science journalism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_journalism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:47.224072+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: science-journalism-20260505-0
summary:
== Criticism == Science journalists regularly come under criticism for misleading reporting of scientific stories. All three groups of scientists, journalists and the public often criticize science journalism for bias and inaccuracies. However, with the increasing collaborations online between science journalists there may be potential with removing inaccuracies. The 2010 book Merchants of Doubt by historians of science Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway argues that in topics like the global warming controversy, tobacco smoking, acid rain, DDT and ozone depletion, contrarian scientists have sought to "keep the controversy alive" in the public arena by demanding that reporters give false balance to the minority side. Very often, such as with climate change, this leaves the public with the impression that disagreement within the scientific community is much greater than it actually is. Science is based on experimental evidence and testing, and disputation is a normal activity. Scholars have criticized science journalists for: Uncritical reporting Emphasizing frames of scientific progress and economic prospect Not presenting a range of expert opinion Having preferences toward positive messages Reporting unrealistic timelines and engaging in the production of a "cycle of hype" Science journalists can be seen as the gatekeepers of scientific information. Just like


id: administratium-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administratium-0.md
category: reference
title: Administratium
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administratium
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:48.553629+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: administratium-20260505-0
summary:
Administratium is a well-known in-joke in scientific circles and is a parody both on the bureaucracy of the scientific community and academic institutions, and on descriptions of newly discovered chemical elements. In 1991, Thomas Kyle (the supposed discoverer of this element) was awarded an Ig Nobel Prize for physics, making him one of only three fictional people to have won the award. A spoof article was written by William DeBuvitz in 1988 and first appeared in print in the January 1989 issue of The Physics Teacher. It spread rapidly among university campuses and research centers; many versions surfaced, often customized to the contributor's situation. A similar joke concerns Administrontium which was referenced in print in 1993. Another variation on the same joke is Bureaucratium. A commonly heard description describes it as "having a negative half-life". In other words, the more time passes, the more massive "Bureaucratium" becomes; it only grows larger and more sluggish. This refers to the bureaucratic system, which is generally perceived as a system in which bureaucratic procedures accumulate, and whatever needs to get done takes increasingly longer to get done as soon as it touches the bureaucracy. == See also == Unobtainium Wishalloy List of fictional


id: the-craft-of-science-writing-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Craft_of_Science_Writing-0.md
category: reference
title: The Craft of Science Writing
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Craft_of_Science_Writing
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:49.705224+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-craft-of-science-writing-20260505-0
summary:
The Craft of Science Writing: Selections from The Open Notebook is a non-fiction book edited by Siri Carpenter and published in 2020 by The Open Notebook. == Synopsis == The Craft of Science Writing presents more than 30 articles, some new, others previously published on The Open Notebook website, organized to answer five questions: "Who is a science journalist and how do you become one? What makes a science story and how do you find one? How do you report a science story? How do you tell your story? How do you build expertise in science writing?" In ALA's CHOICE, Melody Herr wrote that the articles are organized "into an introductory course that covers becoming a science journalist, identifying a story idea, conducting research, writing the story, and building proficiency in core skills". She also said the articles demonstrate effective idea presentation, "through personal anecdotes, interviews with award-winning journalists, expert panel discussions, and visuals, including a marked-up science article, a flowchart, and helpful checklists". Jonathan Wai wrote in Psychology Today, that it "...seeks to illuminate the craft of science writing by collecting numerous perspectives from science writers themselves about how to improve their own craft of science writing." Carolyn Crist


id: microphotography-literature-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microphotography_(literature)-0.md
category: reference
title: Microphotography (literature)
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microphotography_(literature)
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:50.912503+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: microphotography-literature-20260505-0
summary:
Microphotography is a writing style that emerged in the early 1990s in science journalism. The style is named after micrographs and is distinctive for its highly detailed, worm's eye or microscopic view of the macroscopic world. One of the flagship works in this style was David Bodanis's commercially prominent The Secret House: 24 hours in the strange & wonderful world in which we spend our nights and days. This book followed daily life in a typical enclosed human habitat in minute detail, featuring detailed physical and biological explanations. == References ==


id: nature-writing-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_writing-0.md
category: reference
title: Nature writing
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_writing
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:52.137502+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: nature-writing-20260505-0
summary:
Nature writing is nonfiction or fiction prose about the natural environment. It often draws heavily from scientific information and facts while also incorporating philosophical reflection upon various aspects of nature. Works are frequently written in the first person and include personal observations. Nature writing encompasses a wide variety of works, ranging from those that place primary emphasis on natural history (such as field guides) to those focusing on philosophical interpretation. It includes poetry, essays of solitude or escape, as well as travel and adventure writing. Modern-day nature writing traces its roots to works of natural history that initially gained popularity in the second half of the 18th century, and continued to do so throughout the 19th century. An important early figure in nature writing was the parson-naturalist Gilbert White (1720–1793), a pioneering English naturalist and ornithologist. He is best known for writing Natural History and Antiquities of Selborne (1789). William Bartram (1739–1823) was another significant American pioneer naturalist who became a respected figure in literary and scientific communities after his first work was published in 1791. == Early history == The tradition of clerical naturalists can be traced back to the monastic writings of the Middle Ages, although under modern-day


id: nature-writing-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_writing-1.md
category: reference
title: Nature writing
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_writing
date_saved: 2026-05-05T07:08:52.137502+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: nature-writing-20260505-0
summary:
== 20th century to date == The second half of the 20th century saw a significant increase in nature writing in fiction and non-fiction in Britain. One of the earliest of these works was John Moore (1907–1967), a best-selling pioneer conservationist. Writing from the 1930s to 1960s, he was described by Sir Compton Mackenzie as the most talented writer about the countryside of his generation. Moore's contemporaries included Henry Williamson (1895–1977), best known for Tarka the Otter, whose imaginative prose won him the Hawthornden Prize in 1928. Other 20th century writers included American authors Edward Abbey (1927–1989), Aldo Leopold (1887–1948) and Indian author M. Krishnan (1912–1996). After World War II, other writers emerged including English teacher and naturalist Margaret Hutchinson (1904–1997), who strongly advocated for raising children as naturalists from an early age. American author Rachel Carson (1907–1964) is known for Silent Spring, published in 1962. Carson heralded a new and pointed style of nature writing that carried stronger warnings of environmental loss as pesticide use in industrial agriculture became an increasing concern after World War II. Relevant contemporary nature writers in Britain include Richard Mabey, Roger Deakin, Mark Cocker, and Oliver Rackham. Rackham's books included Ancient Woodland (1980) and


