Yes, he did. He talks about how scientists (natural philosophers, as they said then)
struggled with the idea that work with your hands, necessary to set up experiments,
was not respectable for gentlemen, but the testimony of rude mechanics was not
credible. --jks
In a message dated Fri, 4 Aug 2000 10:48:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "Charles Brown"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
<<
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/03/00 11:17PM >>>
<< Jim D. wrote: "who is it that determines who a "real authority" is? Is
there
a World
Congress of Philosophers who makes this decision?" >>
A very interesting question. Steve Shapin has explored this question with
respexct to early modern science in his Leviathan and the Air Pump (about
Hobbes and Boyle) and The Social History of Truth. The short and banal
version of a sophisticated and interesting answer is that it's partly the
consensus of the powerful people in the profession, which itself is in part a
function of who is trusted. Shapin argues that moral authority (and in early
modern science, class) has a lot to do with it. --jks
__________
CB: When you say "class" , did Shapin find any pattern that the ruling ideas,
including philosophical, are significantly influenced by the ideas of the ruling
classes , the real authorities, so to speak ?
>>
