[Not Available].

G Baroncini

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11636513

[Not Available].

G Baroncini

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Through the history of the book and the image at the time of the invention of the printing press, this study seeks to clarify the ambiguous situation of the scientific illustration, the reasons for the difficulty in recognizing it as an internal element of scientific discourse as language that is autonomous, competitive and in certain cases stronger than verbal language. This study also investigates an iconoclastic current within scientific inquiry. This tradition permits the identification of a common historical misunderstanding: the false equating of observation and experimentation, on the one hand, and the collocation of research to graphic representation on the other. Finally, the article proposes the application of the interpretation proposed by Panofsky in the past thirty years to the study of the scientific illustration.

Explore related subjects

Historiography History, 15th Century History, 16th Century History, 20th Century Medical Illustration Science English Abstract Historical Article Journal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

G Baroncini. 1996. [Not Available].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11636513/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2003

Between doubts and certainties: on the place of history of science in Islamic societies within the field of history of science.

I discuss my long-term observation that history of science in Islamic societies is marginalized within the general history of science community as well as in the academic world of Islamic studies, Near Eastern language and civilization programs, Middle Eastern history, or the investigation of the modern Muslim world. I ask what the possible causes for this situation are and what can be done to change the bleak situation.

Historiography↗

PubMed2003

On the origins of psychoanalytic psychohistory.

This article examines the origins and early development of psychoanalytically inspired psychohistory from the late 1950s to the early 1970s. It focuses on Erik H. Erikson, Bruce Mazlish, and Robert Jay Lifton and illustrates their contributions to psychoanalytic psychohistory. Erikson, Mazlish, and Lifton were core members of the Wellfleet group, a research project originally funded by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1965 to conceptualize the foundation of psychohistory. The article gives an account of the early history of the Wellfleet group and argues for specific historical reasons to explain why psychoanalytic psychohistory emerged on the East Coast of the United States in the late 1950s and early 1960s. A critique of the Wellfleet group in unpublished correspondence of Erich Fromm and David Riesman is also discussed.

Historiography↗

PubMed2003

Facts, values, and policies: a comment on Howard H. Kendler (2002).

In a recent article, Howard H. Kendler (2002) criticized Kenneth B. Clark and the other social scientists who worked in Brown v. Board of Education for polluting their science with value judgments. This article argues that Kendler's critique is misguided because it conflates a policy judgment with a value judgment. In addition, Kendler inconsistently applied his own standard of objectivity when he examined in the social science used in Brown.

Historiography↗