Early nineteenth-century natural history books reveal that British naturalists depended heavily on correspondence as a means for gathering information and specimens. Edward Newman commented in hisHistory of British Ferns: ‘Were I to make out a list ofallthe correspondents who have assisted me it would be wearisome from its length.’ Works such as William Withering'sBotanical Arrangementshow that artisans numbered among his correspondents. However, the literary products of scientific practice reveal little of the workings or such correspondences and how or why they (...) were sustained. An exchange or letters is maintained if the interests of both recipient and writer are satisfied. Withering's book tells us only that his interests were served by his correspondents; it allows us to say nothing with certainty about the interests of those who wrote to him. Published texts effectively hide the means by which the author determined the veracity of distant correspondents and also the way these informants demonstrated their credibility. (shrink)

Among the many groups of scholars whose work now illuminates science, technology and medicine (STM), historians, it seems to me, have a key responsibility not just to elucidate change but to establish and explain variety. One of the big pictures we need is a model of the varieties of STM over time; one which does not presume the timeless existence of disciplines, or the distinctions between science, technology and medicine; a model which is both synchronic and diachronic, and both cognitive (...) and social. To that end, this brief paper presents a historical typology of STM from about 1700 to the present by focusing on four ‘ideal’ socio-cognitive types – four knowledge structures which correspond to four sets of social relations. To some extent these are period specific, but they do not have to be – hence, one may hope, the flexibility and usefulness of the model. (shrink)

Why is science so credible? Usual answers center on scientists' objective methods or their powerful instruments. In his new book, Thomas Gieryn argues that a better explanation for the cultural authority of science lies downstream, when scientific claims leave laboratories and enter courtrooms, boardrooms, and living rooms. On such occasions, we use "maps" to decide who to believe—cultural maps demarcating "science" from pseudoscience, ideology, faith, or nonsense. Gieryn looks at episodes of boundary-work: Was phrenology good science? How about cold fusion? (...) Is social science really scientific? Is organic farming? After centuries of disputes like these, Gieryn finds no stable criteria that absolutely distinguish science from non-science. Science remains a pliable cultural space, flexibly reshaped to claim credibility for some beliefs while denying it to others. In a timely epilogue, Gieryn finds this same controversy at the heart of the raging "science wars.". (shrink)

In this first comprehensive and systematic study of Pierre BourdieuÆs theory of culture and habitus, Bridget Fowler examines the intellectual context of BourdieuÆs work, while providing an exacting and systematic reading of the development of his thinking on "cultural capital." Pierre Bourdieu and Cultural Theory outlines the key critical debates that inform BourdieuÆs work: the role of Lukßcs and Goldmann, BenjaminÆs discussion of the sacred and the secular; and HabermasÆs examination of communication. Fowler goes on to provide a lexicon of (...) BourdieuÆs thought in cultural theory, explaining the importance of capitalùeconomic and social, symbolic, and culturalùas well as outlining the importance of key terms like habitus, practice and strategy, "legitimate culture," and consumer society, in the context of BourdieuÆs analysis of capitalism and modernity. There is also substantive analysis of BourdieuÆs work on contemporary culture. This critical examination concludes with a discussion of the state and education as exemplified in BourdieuÆs latest work. Comprehensive, critical, and rigorous, this is the definitive guide to the changing contours of BourdieuÆs cultural theory. It will be the essential reference for students of sociology, cultural studies, and social theory. (shrink)