2. But first –additional comments on the
definitions of science
Last time I talked about the political or
rhetorical functions served by several
different definitions of science ---this does
not mean that I think that most people
who accept those definitions are aware of
those functions or the circumstances that
gave rise to them.
A good example of how historians can help in
understanding aspects of what we believe but
are not conscious about.
3. Definitions of science -- continued
Definitions not “arbitrary” in 2 senses
1. As historians we want to know how those engaged in
knowledge producing activities in the past thought that they
were doing –i.e. preamble of charter of Royal society of
London says “The business of the Royal Society is: to
improve the knowledge of natural things, and all useful arts,
Manufactures, Mechanic practices, Engynes, and
Inventions by experiment.” So some definitions may be
more reflective of past experiences than others.
2. Important to recognize what “linguistic community”
subscribes to what definitions & why.
4. Objectivity, value neutrality, and the
logical positivist “normative” definition of
science.
“normative” vs “descriptive” understandings of science –logical
positivism & its descendents vs Thomas Kuhn’s Structure of
Scientific Revolutions (1962) and its descendents.
“German Science” & the Vienna Circle –how would science have
to be done to make its knowledge claims independent of the
context in which they were produced—i.e. to make them
universally valid and to ensure the progressive nature of science.
–”build the wall brick by brick” notion.
Has tremendous appeal for scientists –they have a uniquely
progressive approach to the world –use Sarton.
5. The Kuhnian “revolution” in history of
science
Kuhn’s problem –science is progressive but
revolutions frequently force scientists to reject older
knowledge claims –i.e Copernican rev, rejection of
phlogiston chemistry, etc.
How can this happen– Kuhn’s emphasis on
“Paradigms,” “normal science,” “anomalies,” the
incommensurability of competing paradigms.
Emphasizes both the way that authority is exercised
in science, and
The ultimately social processes which lead to the
domination of new paradigms.
6. Back now to the Industrial Revolution
My views come primarily from 3 sources
1. David Landes, The Unbound Prometeus: Technological
Change and Industrial Development in Western Europe
from 1750 to the Present (1970) Still widely held to be the
best historical account of European industrialization.
2. W. W. Rostow The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-
Communist Manifesto (1961) – has critics –but still often
used as 1st
approximation by modernization theorists
4. A.E. Musson & Eric Robinson, Science and Technology
in the Industrial Revolution (1969).
9. Demographic considerations
Industrialization depends, among other things
on the growth of a labor force not engaged in
primary food production (in pre-industrial
societies typically 75-95% of labor force is
food producing –in advanced industrial
societies i.e. U.S. today ~3%.
“Green revolution” of early 18th
c in England
allows for dramatic sustained population
growth with little change in agricultural labor
force.
11. Other considerations related to
agriculture
Green revolution produces capital accumulation for
investment.
i.e. Coke of Upham raises annual income from his farm
from £2,000 to £20,000 from 1750-1790 – much of
increase he invests.
More typically, Phyllis Deane reports average farmer’s
income £8 in 1700, £15 in 1750, £22 in 1790, with
constant or lowered expenses. Increased disposable
income creates a market for goods; but
Depresses worker’s wages as unemployment soars.
13. Science & Green Revolution
Green revolution produces conditions to prepare for
take off –was there a connection to “science”?
Certainly technological innovations are important.
Scientific attitudes and practices more important
than conceptual content –emphasis on experiments
with breeding, new crops, new fertilizers & rotation
systems, new plows, Tull’s seed drill.
Institutionalized in organizations like The
Honourable the Society for Improvers of Agriculture
(1723).
14. Take-off
Growth of commerce stimulated both by
increase in ag. productivity and by
exploitation of colonies –rapid increase in
persons Defoe called “the middling sort” –i.e.
middle class –with some cash and
aspirations. (Landes -48)
Technological innovations in transportation
(initially canals), Later in RRs
Social overhead capital –large capital/low but
steady return
15. Canal Building
Key role of “projectors”, we now call
entrepreneurs—
i.e Duke of Bridgewater, FRS, enthusiast for
improving projects –hires James Brindley to build
canal from coal mine on his property to
Manchester (1759) –price of coal in Manchester
drops 90%
Grand trunk canal begun 1766 –investors include
Erasmus Darwin, Josiah Wedgewood, Matthew
Boulton, James Watt– all members of the Lunar
Society of Birmingham
16. Take-off -- 2
Technological innovations in textiles allows
production of cheap cotton cloth
Most first generation mechanical improvements –Kay’s
flying shuttle(1733), Hargreve’s Spinning Jenny (1770),
Arkwright’s water frame (1769) and Carding engine (1775)
–done by “mechanics”
But some by persons with demonstrated mathematical and
scientific training:
Crompton, inventor of the “mule” for spinning up to 350
spindles at a time educated by mathematician Wm Barlow
Edmund Cartwright –inventor of power loom an Oxford
educated clergyman –also trained in medicine –interested in
agricultural improvements & mechanics—designed new loom
then hired a carpenter and smith to construct it
17. Take-off –3 –relations to science
Improvements in Power sources –
Clearly driven by scientific practices and theories
—i.e Smeaton’s theoretically informed
experiments on over/undershot waterwheels—led
to widespread use.
Watt’s work on separate condenser steam engine
—theoretically informed, systematically carried out
–by person informally but thoroughly educated in
contemporary sciences
19. Watt --1
Grandfather taught mathematics; father a shipwright
who studies math and natural philosophy as a
hobby; James educated at Greenock Academy –
strong in math.; he studies major Newtonian text,
S’Gravesande’s Mathematical Elements of Natural
Philosophy by age 15, learns German and Italian to
read works in mechanics and instrument making –
reads widely then experiments extensively –
inventing new, theoretically informed measuring
instruments (engine indicator card) to study
efficiency of steam engines
21. Intended Upshot of Take-off
Productivity of yarn maker increases ~100
fold
Price of yarn drops from 38p/lb. to 6p/lb.
between 1760 and 1800
Value of British cotton production:
£ .5 million in 1760
£ 5 million in 1800
£ 50 million in 1835
22. Some unintended consequences
Deskilling of jobs, dramatic increase in employment
of women, children, depression of wages –longer
hours.
The Luddite response.
Social dislocations –i.e. incidences of first
conception out of wedlock ~12% 1700, ~50% in
1780; more than half of these ended with single
mothers on poor relief (huge welfare burden) leads
to tax rebellions.
Sanitation can’t keep up with urban growth –
diseases –temporary dramatic increase in mortality
rates. Typhoid epidemics.
23. Science and Drive to Maturity
Fueled heavily by chemical processes
Bleaching story told in reading
Wedgewood story told in reading
One begins to see scientific knowledge as well as attitudes and
practices playing a greater role
Soda production story: Soda (NaCO3) needed for baking & for mgfr.
of soaps & glass –traditionally produced by burning kelp, but demand
grows too rapidly for supply to keep up
French Academie des Sciences offers 12,000 livre prize for invention
of commercially feasible method. Chemist Joseph LeBlanc wins
(heat salt with sulphuric acid, creates sodium sulphate; heat with
limestone & coal [carbon], sodium carbonate[soda] leached out with
water & collected by evaporating water)
Eban Horsford story in U.S.
