CALL FOR PAPERS
Sidelined Sciences? Shifting Centres in Nineteenth-Century Scientific
Thinking
A collection of essays on the status of scientific ideas
<http://www.english.cam.ac.uk/cfp/side_sci.htm>
IN THE EARLY nineteenth century, to express a belief in the transmutation
of species was to invite opprobrium and ridicule; phrenology, on the other
hand, was considered a serious field of scientific enquiry by many
intelligent men and women. Thomas Huxley, for instance, publicly denounced
the 'unscientific' credentials of those who held evolutionary beliefs;
George Eliot, it is said, had her head shaved for a phrenological
examination of her skull.
Modern prejudices tend to dominate how we look back on earlier
intellectual frameworks, with current values acting as reference points by
which past ideas are judged: a set of historically linear trials and
errors culminating in what we regard as 'right' thinking. At any given
moment certain ideas will be regarded as central while others will be
relegated to the fringes of respectability. Despite claims for empirical
objectivity, science is not immune to the vagaries of intellectual
fashion. This volume develops the recent trend by scholars in the history
of science to move away from the 'linear' model, by attempting to
recontextualize different scientific ideas, and thereby to explore the
factors which raised some to prominence, and shunted others to the
margins.
The last two hundred years demonstrate clearly how the 'value' of certain
scientific ideas shifts radically over time. The proposed volume is
intended to relocate those scientific ideas in their original intellectual
and social context, and to explore the grounds on which cultures privilege
particular scientific ideologies. Contributions will discuss a number of
questions about scientific centrality/marginality in the 'long' nineteenth
century (1789-1914): * What determined whether a particular scientific
idea carried authoritative status? * How did shifting criteria for 'proof'
affect what was regarded as cutting-edge, and what was on the extreme
fringes? * How did different production media signify the varying status
of the sciences? * How did the advocates of scientific ideas see
themselves, whether central or marginal? * How did other professionals and
the public regard them?
We invite abstracts and expressions of interest in any of these questions
or anything that relates to the subjective centrality/marginality of
scientific ideas in the nineteenth century. While this project will be of
specific interest to historians of science, we will be happy to consider
relevant abstracts from scholars of any discipline (including scientists).
We expect the shifting centrality/marginality axis to be the reference
point for all essays, but within that limitation the options are broad.
Selected topics for proposals may include:
* Medical reform; Sanitation & sanitary science; Comparative anatomy;
Medicine & drugs; Anaesthetics; Vaccination; Medical equipment
* Religion & belief; Natural theology; The Bridgewater Treatises;
Materialism
* Mathematics; Chemistry; Astronomy; Cosmology; Engineering; Technology;
Electricity; Computing; Photography; Taxonomy; Geology; Natural history;
Botany & botanical gardens; Zoology & zoos
* Animal magnetism; Spiritualism; Phrenology; Psychology; Sexology;
Hysteria; Hypnosis; Mesmerism; Telepathy; Spontaneous generation of life
* Exploration & discovery; Voyaging & collecting; Marine science; Space
travel; Time travel
* Transformism/evolution; Race & anthropology; Eugenics; Degeneration;
Genetics; Atavism
* The Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge; The Library of Useful
Knowledge; The Mechanic's Institutes; Laboratory science; Science in
education; Working class scientific societies; Women & scientific learning
* The status of science; Professionalization of science; Military science
& technology; Politics of science; Philosophies of science; Public
reception of science & technology; Amateur science; Anxieties about
science & technology; Science fiction
Essays on specific individual figures, whether scientific or otherwise,
will also be considered. Abstracts of 500 words should be sent by 31
December 2001. If sending abstracts by e-mail, our preferred method,
please include it in the body text and not as an attachment. Send to all
of the following:
David Clifford (djhc2@cam.ac.uk), Clare Hall, Cambridge, CB3 9AL
Elisabeth Wadge (esw1001@cam.ac.uk), Newnham College, Cambridge, CB3 9DF
Alex Warwick (a.warwick@westminster.ac.uk), Univ. of Westminster, 309
Regent Street, London W1B 2UW
Martin Willis (wilm1@worc.ac.uk), University College Worcester, Henwick
Grove, Worcester WR2 6AJ
===============================================
From the Literary Calls for Papers Mailing List
CFP@english.upenn.edu
Full Information at
http://www.english.upenn.edu/CFP/
or write Erika Lin: elin@english.upenn.edu
===============================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Nov 05 2001 - 13:52:20 EST