3 ms·
Vial and Error: Revisiting the “Whig Interpretation” in the History of Science
- benbreen 11y agoYes, the subtitle of the article as it was published is different, but as the author of the piece I felt ok with switching it out for the more straightforward and descriptive one I wanted to use (authors almost never have final say over headlines). Happy to answer any questions, or debate anyone who really loved the David Wootton or Steven Weinberg books! I actually enjoyed reading Weinberg's book quite a bit, especially his commitment to getting the technical details right, but I found the overarching picture it gives of the history of science to be unpersuasive for reasons which hopefully are made clear in the article. Here's Steven Weinberg's New York Review of Books article for background on his basic approach to the history of science: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2015/12/17/eye-present-whig-history-science/ http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2015/12/17/eye-present-whig-...