The History of Scientific Practice

科学理论传统上一直是人们关注的中心， 科学的历史、哲学和社会学。 毕竟， 这些理论上的重大突破 重新定位了我们对世界的理解， “科学革命”。“事实上，哲学家认为，从逻辑上讲， 无论如何，即使是意想不到的和矛盾的观察， 实验结果可以通过某些改变来适应， 公认的理论。 然而，话虽如此，每个人都认识到， 这是科学的实践--科学家们每天所做的， 他们每天都在积极地测试自然--这真的需要研究。 它 例如，在实践中，人们会理解传统是如何 是保留下来的还是民族“风格”的发展。 但正是这种 “实践”是最隐蔽的。 学生们被教导， 但不是在教科书上。 科学论文呈现的是结果，而不是 实践 麦科马赫教授的项目，与克里斯塔博士合作 Jungnickel将研究这个最重要但最不为人所知的问题 在科学的关键时期的背景下， 科学发展之前的时期 学科 他的研究将集中在成员的工作， 世纪的皇家学会， 社会自己广泛的档案记录和丰富的收藏， 其成员的手稿。 因为这项研究使用了广泛定义的 作为分析工具的科学实践范畴， 广泛借鉴了科学家的工作生活， 通过这些手稿和信件我们可以接触到。 这 研究的目的是将科学实践及其结果 在伦敦的背景下，英国的知识，社会和 经济生活 通过这样做，它揭示了连接和平行 在18世纪世纪英国科学和它的背景之间， 对英国科学的发展至关重要。

Scientific theory has traditionally been the center of attention in the history, philosophy and sociology of science. It is, after all, these grand theoretical breakthroughs which have so radically reoriented our understanding of our world and which bring about scientific "revolutions." Indeed, philosophers argue that, logically speaking anyway, even unexpected and contradictory observations and experimental results can be accommodated with certain alterations to the accepted theory. Having said this, however, everyone recognizes that it is the practice of science--what scientists do from day to day in their active testing of nature--which really needs study. It is in practice, for example, that one gain understand how traditions are preserved or national "styles" developed. But it is this "practice" which is most hidden from view. Students are taught it, but not in text books. Scientific papers present results, not practice. Professor McCormmach's project, working with Dr. Christa Jungnickel, will investigate this most important yet least understood aspect of science in the context of a critical period in science's development, the period just before the development of scientific disciplines. His research will center on the work of the members of the Royal Society in the 18th century and will be made possible by the society's own extensive archival records and rich collections of manuscripts of its members. Because the study uses broadly defined categories of scientific practice as its tool of analysis, the work draws extensively on the working lives of scientists, which are accessible to us through these manuscripts and correspondences. This study has the purpose of placing scientific practice and its results within the context of London, of British intellectual, social and economic life. By doing so, it exposes connections and parallels between 18th century British science and its context that were important for the development of British science.