• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >The curious and the learned: Natural history in the early American republic.
【24h】

The curious and the learned: Natural history in the early American republic.

机译：好奇和博学的：美国早期共和国的自然历史。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This study offers a cultural history of natural history in the early American republic. It focuses on natural knowledge conflicts to expose epistemological dissonance, competing rules of evidence, and the contested nature of scientific authority. It demonstrates that natural history was not confined to an intellectual elite but was a cultural project in which the American population eagerly participated. But, this democratic interest and the fluid structures of scientific authority spawned idiosyncratic and enthusiastic theories frequently challenged by naturalists positioning themselves as experts. Interpretive disputes between the “curious” and the “learned” exposed competing philosophies of inquiry and incompatible evidentiary rules, different codes of thought and behavior that compelled adherence to unbalanced thresholds of belief in natural history matters. These natural knowledge conflicts shaped the trajectory of American science, the contours of national identity, and everyday interactions with the natural world.; The character of early republican natural history was forged in response to the European indictment of American nature, the result of European reliance on theories, not facts. American natural historians advocated personal observation as the best method to catalogue the new nation, arguing that nature would reveal itself to Americans regardless of education or social standing. What was reported resembled folk-knowledge more than modern science. Individual chapters examine tales of submerging swallows, the intersection of botany and market economics, early republican theories of ancient history, and natural theology to reveal how competing forms of natural knowledge frustrated naturalists pushing natural history away from mere fact collecting toward a pattern-driven discipline.; This project is as much about early republican culture as the history of science. It demonstrates that an investigation of the natural world was a meeting ground between elites and ordinary Americans, a mutual endeavor in which one interpretive approach eventually took precedence over, but did not eradicate, another. It joins on-going debates about the structure and limits of authority in the years following the Revolution, the persistence of “non scientific” understandings of nature challenging conclusions concerning scientific hegemony.
机译：这项研究提供了美国早期共和国自然历史的文化史。它侧重于自然知识冲突，以揭示认识论上的不和谐，相互竞争的证据规则以及科学权威的有争议的本质。它表明自然历史不仅仅局限于知识分子精英，而是美国人民热切参与的文化项目。但是，这种民主的兴趣和科学权威的流动结构产生了特质和热情的理论，这些理论经常受到自然主义者将自己定位为专家的挑战。 “好奇”和“博学的”之间的解释性争执暴露了相互竞争的探究哲学和不相容的证据规则，不同的思想和行为准则，迫使人们坚持对自然历史信仰的不平衡阈值问题。这些自然知识的冲突塑造了美国科学的轨迹，国家认同的轮廓以及与自然世界的日常互动。共和党早期自然历史的特征是根据欧洲对美国性的起诉而形成的，这是欧洲对理论而不是事实的依赖的结果。美国自然历史学家提倡个人观察是对新国家进行分类的最佳方法，他们认为大自然会向美国人展示自己，而不管其教育或社会地位如何。报告的内容比现代科学更像民间知识。各章探讨了燕子淹没的故事，植物学与市场经济学的交汇点，早期的共和历史的古代共和理论以及自然神学，以揭示自然知识的竞争形式如何挫败了自然主义者，将自然历史从单纯的事实收集推向了模式驱动的学科。;这个项目与早期的共和文化和科学史一样重要。它表明，对自然界的调查是精英人士与普通美国人之间的交汇处，这是一种相互的努力，其中一种解释方法最终优先于但没有根除另一种解释方法。它伴随着关于大革命后数年权威的结构和局限性的持续辩论，对自然的“非科学”理解的持续存在对有关科学霸权的结论提出了挑战。

著录项

  • 作者

    Lewis, Andrew John.;

  • 作者单位

    Yale University.;

  • 授予单位 Yale University.;
  • 学科 History United States.; American Studies.; History of Science.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2001
  • 页码 265 p.
  • 总页数 265
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 美洲史;自然科学史;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号