In 1926 and 1927, James W. Alexander and Kurt Reidemeister claimed to have made “the same” crucial breakthrough in a branch of modern topology which soon thereafter was called knot theory. A detailed comparison of the techniques and objects studied in these two roughly simultaneous episodes of mathematical research shows, however, that the two mathematicians worked in quite different mathematical traditions and that they drew on related, but distinctly different epistemic resources. These traditions and resources were local, not universal elements (...) of mathematical culture. Even certain common features of the main publications such as their modernist, formal style of exposition can be explained by reference to particular constellations in the intellectual and professional environments of Alexander and Reidemeister. In order to analyze the role of such elements and constellations of mathematical research practice, a historiographical perspective is developed which emphasizes parallels with the recent historiography of experiment. In particular, a notion characterizing those “working units of scientific knowledge production” which Hans-Jörg Rheinberger has termed “experimental systems” in the case of empirical sciences proves helpful in understanding research episodes such as those bringing about modern knot theory. (shrink)

We mourn the loss of Yehuda Elkana, founding editor of this journal. Setting science in context was a mission of his life. For him this did not mean to relativize and historicize science to the point where it is no longer distinguishable as central to the human quest for knowledge. Rather, an understanding of science as being rooted in social, material, and cultural contexts was for him the key to its central role for solving the problems of humanity with which (...) he was so deeply concerned. (shrink)

After more than a decade Alexandre Métraux is leaving his post as a co-editor of Science in Context and will remain as a member of the editorial board.

ZusammenfassungDie Einleitung zu unserem Themenheft bietet einen kurzen Überblick über bisherige historische Literatur zum Wissen über Indien im nationalsozialistischen Deutschland und skizziert drei verschiedene, aber miteinander verbundene Schichten solchen Kenntnissen: Disziplinäre Kenntnisse der Indologie als akademisches Fachgebiet, Wissen, das den Bedürfnissen staatlicher Stellen gerecht wird, und Allgemeinwissen (und Überzeugungen) über Indien.

v. 1. Cultures and politics of research from the early modern period to the age of extremes --.

Four Remarks Concerning “the Situation of the History of Science in Germany”. The following remarks contain four brief reflections, based on my experience in teaching the history of science: (1) on the limitations of any national perspective on the history of science, (2) on the subject and task of the history of science, (3) on the power and weakness of knowledge as topics for the history of science, and (4) on the possibilities of scientific imagination as a critical issue for (...) the future development of our field. (shrink)

Many of us view the world of science as a firm bastion of knowledge, with each new discovery and further illumination adding to an unshakable foundation of natural truths. Weak Knowledge aims to rattle our faith, not in core certainties of scientific findings but in their strength as accessible resources. The authors show how, throughout history, many bodies of research have become precarious due to a host of factors. These factors have included cultural or social disinterest, feeble empirical evidence or (...) theoretical justifications, and a lack of practical applications in a given field's findings. This book brings together cases from a range of historical periods and disciplines, ranging from personal medicine to climatology, to illuminate the specific forms, functions, and dynamics of so-called "weak" bodies of knowledge. (shrink)