5 ms·
According to philosopher/historian Laura Snyder, this claim is not true. The word scientist was coined over a debate on whether "natural philosophers" was accur
by disown 6y ago
According to philosopher/historian Laura Snyder, this claim is not true. The word scientist was coined over a debate on whether "natural philosophers" was accurate/narrow enough of a term to describe what they were doing. In answer to a challenge by poet coleridge, Whewell came up with the term scientist - 'If philosophers is too wide and lofty a term then, by analogy with artist, we may form scientist. In other words, snobbish philosophers who worked with their minds looked down on these "scientists" who worked with their hands and wanted to differentiate themselves from scientists.
Here is her wonderful TED talk describing the history of 'scientist'. It's interesting how since then, the reputation of scientist has risen and philosophers have dropped. Now philosophers and everyone else from economists and political 'scientists' want to be called scientists.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc_-Y9rDN2g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc_-Y9rDN2g
We are told that in war, truth is the first casualty. Sadly this is true for the culture war as almost everything peddle during this war is half-truths or outright lies. The worrisome part is that so much of media and tech is involved in the disinformation. For anything remotely cultural, I know if it's in wikipedia, the nytimes or posted here, it's most likely bullshit. But nevertheless the bullshit must flow.
[from the article]
"That women should face such an Everestine climb toward inclusion and equality is a piece of curious and rather cruel cultural irony, for the very word “scientist” didn’t always have the overwhelmingly male connotations it has had in recent history. In fact, it was a coined for a woman — the Victorian polymath Mary Somerville"
The above is pretty much all cultural propaganda.
1. Women didn't face everestine climb. Especially privileged wealthy white women like somerville. Sure she had some hurdles, but nothing her privilege couldn't overcome. Somerville had it easier than 90% of men and 95% of women.
2. Scientist always had an overwhelmingly male connotation because scientists are/were overwhelmingly male. Not saying it should be this way or not, but just stating reality.
3. It was indeed not fact, that the term scientist, was coined for a woman.
I doubt the author or the site will correct their lies. I doubt wikipedia will fix their site. And I doubt this is the last we'll see of this here.
Edit: Of course these "warriors" are now distracting with straw man comments. The first 3 minutes of Laura Synder's ted talk explains the origins of scientist. It's not that long of a watch. If you think she's lying or mistaken, then feel free to comment on that. But I see no reason why she would lie and all the evidence, including the one's the naysayers are posting seems to show she is right.
- bitdizzy 6y agoI found Wikipedia's source on the matter. It is here: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00033796200202722 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/0003379620020272... "With the new meaning of science the need to designate a man of science became more pressing. Hitherto philosopher had served, but, as I have said, philosophy had narrowed in meaning to exclude natural philosophy, except in the minds and mouths of an older generation. An English man of science who called himself a philosopher now did so rather self-consciously, or hastened to qualify the name with the adjectives ' experimental ' or ' natural. ' The French word philosophe was immedi- ately brought to mind, and those designated by that word were not men of science, besides having been notorious atheists. The name scientist was first propounded in the Quarterly Review for March, 1834. The anonymous reviewer made the suggestion, too jocularly, however, to be taken entirely in earnest, in the course of a review of Mrs Somerville's book On the Connexion of the Physical Sciences. From Todhunter's biography 9 we learn that the reviewer was William Whewell, F.R.S." I cannot yet find a copy of the original review and am curious to find it. In any case I think you're a little weird for turning this into a soapbox for your views on a so-called culture war. Edit: Here it is: https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_uWsJAAAAQAAJ/page/n61/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_uWsJAAAAQAAJ/page/n61/mod... I invite people to examine the primary source and come to their own conclusions.
- disown 6y ago> I found Wikipedia's source on the matter. And where exactly is whewell coining the term scientist for somerville? > In any case I think you're a little weird for turning this into a soapbox for your views on a so-called culture war. Did you even read the article? The article is rife with culture war rhetoric. > I invite people to examine the primary source and come to their own conclusions. Why don't you tell us what you found? Or are you saying historian/philosopher Laura Synder is lying/wrong? Or better yet, since you found "the source", why not point us to where whewell says, in somerville's honor, I coin the term scientist. Just because whewell wrote " An English man of science who called himself a philosopher now did so rather self-consciously" in a review of somerville's book doesn't mean that he coined it for her. After all, somerville isn't an english man of science is she?