|
|
|
Review
| The Scientific Revolution and the Foundations of Modern Science, by Wilbur Applebaum. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2005. 243 pages. $45.00, cloth.
|
| In a recent issue of Isis (June 2005), Steven Shapin laments what he calls "the crisis of readership in the history of science." Due to an epidemic of "hyperprofessionalism" in the discipline, Shapin argues, "we are not producing work that many people outside our field want to read." In welcome opposition to this trend, Wilbur Applebaum's overview of the birth of modern science between 1500 and 1700 is designed as an introductory text for "the secondary school and lower-level undergraduate history curriculum." It is a part of a series of such texts in a series: Greenwood Guides to Historic Events from 1500 to 1900. Like the other volumes in the series this one begins with an introductory first chapter followed by a series of thematic chapters, a set of biographies of central figures, select primary sources, a glossary, and an annotated bibliography. Applebaum's thesis is straightforward: "The nature of science in the Early Modern period was revolutionary because it broke decisively with traditional ideas and the ways of doing science that had changed only slightly since ancient times." He develops his case in thematic chapters on astronomy, physics and mathematics, biology and medicine, epistemology and methodology, and the interrelationship of religion and science. There are ample illustrations, and the selection of primary sources is well chosen and comprehensible to nonspecialists. The biographical sketches (of figures like Copernicus, Galileo, Descartes, Newton, William Harvey and others) help the reader understand the personalities behind the ideas. The annotated bibliography, with a caveat listed below, is thorough and up to date. And, all this is admirably brief, as an introductory text of this sort should be. |
1
|
|
That said, this volume might be better suited to a library reserve shelf, to be consulted on specific topics, than assigned as a classroom text. First, the editorial pattern of the series makes the book reader-unfriendly. For instance, the practice of putting interesting biographical information in a separate section makes the central narrative more sterile and abstract than it needs to be. A reader might be more interested in finding out about Newton the man when Newton's ideas are introduced in the chapter on matter and motion. Even given the limitations of the format, however, this particular volume leaves something to be desired. The organization is very disjointed and repetitive. The author jumps rapidly from topic to topic, often leaving out key elements of the context, such as the ideas of the ancients that are being challenged and the thought processes of the "moderns" who are advancing the new ideas. In addition, the chapters seem more intent on listing every possible new insight and discovery (often in a series of passive-voice constructions), than in helping the reader understand the larger trends of the age. Moreover, the frequent intrusion of specialized vocabulary might make this book a challenging read for students without a decent background in science and mathematics. Example: the author, quite appropriately, uses the terms "induction" and "deduction," but those two concepts are never fully defined and they do not appear in the glossary. |
2
|
|
We come next to the issue of accuracy. Applebaum is a Professor Emeritus at the Illinois Institute of Technology, with a great deal of experience in teaching the history of science. His strengths, astronomy and physics, are my weaknesses, and, in those sections of the book I must give him the full benefit of the doubt. But in the area I know best, the history of medicine and disease, the book includes a number of misleading and erroneous statements. For instance, Applebaum states, "contact of Europeans with the New World brought new venereal diseases and fatal epidemics to Europe." The first part of that statement is still widely contested, and the second part is dead wrong—the fatal epidemics went from the Old World to the New, not the other way around. But this is only one of a number of questionable statements in the chapter on the biological sciences. Finally, given the historiographical "revolution" in the history of science since the 1960s, it is unfortunate that the author doesn't say more about how historians have interpreted the events he discusses. Applebaum makes no mention at all, for example, of Thomas Kuhn's path-breaking study The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, a title that does not even appear in the bibliography. Nor does Applebaum discuss the growing body of literature that argues that modern science is a social construction as well as being a disinterested search for the truth. Even if one rejects the claims of the social constructionists, students should be introduced to the concept of history being "an argument without end." In the end, instructors can not go far wrong by assigning instead Herbert Butterfield's The Origins of Modern Science 1300–1800, a bit dated, but still, in the words of a recent book on methodology, "the most readable general introduction to the Scientific Revolution that has been written in English." (J. Appleby, L. Hunt, M. Jacob, Telling the Truth about History, 163). |
3
|
| | |
| Webster University, St. Louis, Missouri |
Michael J. Salevouris |
The following review is reprinted due to a previous error in attribution.
The reviewer is Michael J. Salevouris, not Phillip Sinitiere as stated in the February 2006 issue. |
|
Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.
|