大自然的杰作:C.S.Lewis和Reijer Hooykaas谈培根与科学革命

Q3 Arts and Humanities
A. Smilde
{"title":"大自然的杰作:C.S.Lewis和Reijer Hooykaas谈培根与科学革命","authors":"A. Smilde","doi":"10.3366/ink.2021.0114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines a disagreement which briefly came to light decades ago, half-posthumously, between two twentieth-century Christian scholars, C.S. Lewis (1898–1963) and Reijer Hooykaas (1906–1994), the first Dutch professor in the history of science, who later succeeded to the chair of Eduard Dijksterhuis in Utrecht. Hooykaas and Lewis diverge in their views of the role traditionally ascribed to the work of Francis Bacon (1561–1626) as a major inspiration for the seventeenth-century scientific revolution. Put briefly, while Bacon is a hero for Hooykaas, he is an antihero for Lewis. Sorting out the extent to which either scholar was right not only results in a fairly clear answer but entails, as a bonus, a fine example of what the history of science as an academic discipline is indeed good for.","PeriodicalId":37069,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Inklings Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wonderful Works of Nature: C.S. Lewis and Reijer Hooykaas on Francis Bacon and the Scientific Revolution\",\"authors\":\"A. Smilde\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/ink.2021.0114\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article examines a disagreement which briefly came to light decades ago, half-posthumously, between two twentieth-century Christian scholars, C.S. Lewis (1898–1963) and Reijer Hooykaas (1906–1994), the first Dutch professor in the history of science, who later succeeded to the chair of Eduard Dijksterhuis in Utrecht. Hooykaas and Lewis diverge in their views of the role traditionally ascribed to the work of Francis Bacon (1561–1626) as a major inspiration for the seventeenth-century scientific revolution. Put briefly, while Bacon is a hero for Hooykaas, he is an antihero for Lewis. Sorting out the extent to which either scholar was right not only results in a fairly clear answer but entails, as a bonus, a fine example of what the history of science as an academic discipline is indeed good for.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Inklings Studies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Inklings Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/ink.2021.0114\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Inklings Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/ink.2021.0114","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章探讨了20世纪两位基督教学者C.S.Lewis(1898-1963)和Reijer Hooykaas(1906-1994)之间几十年前(半死后)短暂曝光的分歧,后者是荷兰科学史上第一位教授,后来接替乌得勒支的Eduard Dijksterhuis主席。Hooykaas和Lewis在传统上认为弗朗西斯·培根(1561-1626)的工作是17世纪科学革命的主要灵感来源的观点上存在分歧。简单地说,培根是胡伊卡斯的英雄,而他是刘易斯的反英雄。理清任何一位学者的正确程度,不仅会得到一个相当明确的答案,而且作为一个额外的收获,它还提供了一个很好的例子,说明科学史作为一门学术学科确实有好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Wonderful Works of Nature: C.S. Lewis and Reijer Hooykaas on Francis Bacon and the Scientific Revolution
This article examines a disagreement which briefly came to light decades ago, half-posthumously, between two twentieth-century Christian scholars, C.S. Lewis (1898–1963) and Reijer Hooykaas (1906–1994), the first Dutch professor in the history of science, who later succeeded to the chair of Eduard Dijksterhuis in Utrecht. Hooykaas and Lewis diverge in their views of the role traditionally ascribed to the work of Francis Bacon (1561–1626) as a major inspiration for the seventeenth-century scientific revolution. Put briefly, while Bacon is a hero for Hooykaas, he is an antihero for Lewis. Sorting out the extent to which either scholar was right not only results in a fairly clear answer but entails, as a bonus, a fine example of what the history of science as an academic discipline is indeed good for.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Inklings Studies
Journal of Inklings Studies Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
×
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