In the late 1810s and 1820s the Edinburgh phrenologists were largely concerned with trying to establish phrenology as the true science of mind. They challenged the accepted theories about the nature of mind and the brain; in turn, phrenology was attacked by the proponents of Scottish common-sense philosophy and by some medical men. The ensuing debate, which is discussed as an example of conflict between incommensurable world-views, involved a wide range of contentious theological, philosophical, scientific and methodological issues.

ch. 1. Sistemnoe videnie obrazovanii︠a︡ -- ch. 2. Osnovnye poni︠a︡tii︠a︡ i zadachi -- ch. 5. Osushchestvlenie prot︠s︡essa.

While many aspects of Shapin's historical thesis are accepted, this paper raises objections to specific parts of his historical account, and also to the historiographical assumptions underlying his sociological programme. In particular, Shapin's claim to have explained the Edinburgh phrenology debate in social terms is analysed and rejected.

The participants in this round table have, I see, been basing their conclusions on their personal life experience. In the present situation that is perhaps the most suitable form of expression for me too.