Diogenes’ tub and the double bind of science and vocation in the late Middle Ages

IF 0.5 4区 哲学 Q3 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Catrien Santing
{"title":"Diogenes’ tub and the double bind of science and vocation in the late Middle Ages","authors":"Catrien Santing","doi":"10.1016/j.endeavour.2024.100912","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Intellectuals tend to cherish heroes who embody their ideal way of life. The fact that the personas of the unworldly Greek philosophers Diogenes and Crates were so popular in the late Middle Ages proves that Max Weber’s <em>Idealtypus</em> of the “authentic man of science” (as termed by Steven Shapin) has been problematic for centuries. This finding gives cause to modify Max Weber’s and Shapin's viewpoints about the loss of the “authentic man of science” due to professionalization. The development of the university as an educational institution in the High Middle Ages chained the academic once and for all to a formal training that costs time and money: investments that were expected to have reward. Soon, university-trained experts were highly appreciated by local and national authorities. By combining Frank Rexroth’s and Marcel Bubert’s ideas on the coming into being of an “<em>amor sciendi</em>” in the twelfth century Arts faculties, with David Kaldewey’s and Klaas van Berkel’s appeals for academic autonomy, my article argues that academics have always struggled to protect the pursuit of truth, even while they recognized its vital importance from the beginning.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51032,"journal":{"name":"Endeavour","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160932724000012/pdfft?md5=5f020690d7e432780af77b368c502e95&pid=1-s2.0-S0160932724000012-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endeavour","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160932724000012","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Intellectuals tend to cherish heroes who embody their ideal way of life. The fact that the personas of the unworldly Greek philosophers Diogenes and Crates were so popular in the late Middle Ages proves that Max Weber’s Idealtypus of the “authentic man of science” (as termed by Steven Shapin) has been problematic for centuries. This finding gives cause to modify Max Weber’s and Shapin's viewpoints about the loss of the “authentic man of science” due to professionalization. The development of the university as an educational institution in the High Middle Ages chained the academic once and for all to a formal training that costs time and money: investments that were expected to have reward. Soon, university-trained experts were highly appreciated by local and national authorities. By combining Frank Rexroth’s and Marcel Bubert’s ideas on the coming into being of an “amor sciendi” in the twelfth century Arts faculties, with David Kaldewey’s and Klaas van Berkel’s appeals for academic autonomy, my article argues that academics have always struggled to protect the pursuit of truth, even while they recognized its vital importance from the beginning.

第欧根尼的浴盆与中世纪晚期科学与使命的双重束缚
知识分子往往崇尚体现其理想生活方式的英雄人物。不谙世事的希腊哲学家第欧根尼(Diogenes)和克拉特斯(Crates)的形象在中世纪晚期如此受欢迎,这一事实证明,马克斯-韦伯(Max Weber)的 "真正的科学人 "理想(Idealtypus)(史蒂文-夏平(Steven Shapin)称之为 "真正的科学人")几个世纪以来一直存在问题。这一发现使我们有理由修改马克斯-韦伯和夏平关于 "真正的科学人 "因职业化而丧失的观点。大学作为教育机构在中世纪后期的发展,使学者们一劳永逸地接受了耗费时间和金钱的正规培训,而这些投资是有回报的。很快,大学培养的专家受到了地方和国家当局的高度重视。我的文章将弗兰克-雷克斯罗特和马塞尔-布贝尔关于十二世纪文学院 "爱科学者"(amor sciendi)出现的观点与大卫-卡尔德维和克拉斯-范-贝克尔关于学术自治的呼吁结合起来,论证了学术界一直在努力保护对真理的追求,即使他们从一开始就认识到了真理的至关重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Endeavour
Endeavour 综合性期刊-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
19
审稿时长
49 days
期刊介绍: Endeavour, established in 1942, has, over its long and proud history, developed into one of the leading journals in the history and philosophy of science. Endeavour publishes high-quality articles on a wide array of scientific topics from ancient to modern, across all disciplines. It serves as a critical forum for the interdisciplinary exploration and evaluation of natural knowledge and its development throughout history. Each issue contains lavish color and black-and-white illustrations. This makes Endeavour an ideal destination for history and philosophy of science articles with a strong visual component. Endeavour presents the history and philosophy of science in a clear and accessible manner, ensuring the journal is a valuable tool for historians, philosophers, practicing scientists, and general readers. To enable it to have the broadest coverage possible, Endeavour features four types of articles: -Research articles are concise, fully referenced, and beautifully illustrated with high quality reproductions of the most important source material. -In Vivo articles will illustrate the rich and numerous connections between historical and philosophical scholarship and matters of current public interest, and provide rich, readable explanations of important current events from historical and philosophical perspectives. -Book Reviews and Commentaries provide a picture of the rapidly growing history of science discipline. Written by both established and emerging scholars, our reviews provide a vibrant overview of the latest publications and media in the history and philosophy of science. -Lost and Found Pieces are playful and creative short essays which focus on objects, theories, tools, and methods that have been significant to science but underappreciated by collective memory.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信