Difference between revisions of "Bjelic1994"
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Dusan Bjelic; Michael Lynch; |Title=Goethe's "Protestant Reformation" as a textual demonstration: Comment on Jackson |Tag(s)=EMCA; Ethn...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Dusan Bjelic; Michael Lynch; | + | |Author(s)=Dusan Bjelic; Michael Lynch; |
|Title=Goethe's "Protestant Reformation" as a textual demonstration: Comment on Jackson | |Title=Goethe's "Protestant Reformation" as a textual demonstration: Comment on Jackson | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Ethnomethodology; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Ethnomethodology; |
|Key=Bjelic1994 | |Key=Bjelic1994 | ||
|Year=1994 | |Year=1994 | ||
Revision as of 09:49, 26 March 2015
| Bjelic1994 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Bjelic1994 |
| Author(s) | Dusan Bjelic, Michael Lynch |
| Title | Goethe's "Protestant Reformation" as a textual demonstration: Comment on Jackson |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Ethnomethodology |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1994 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Social Studies of Science |
| Volume | 24 |
| Number | |
| Pages | 703-724 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This Comment takes its point of departure from Myles Jackson's historical study of Goethe's attempt to incite a `protestant reformation' in colour theory. According to Jackson, Goethe tried to unseat the remote authority of Newton's science in favour of a science grounded in non-specialized personal knowledge. Goethe's natural-philosophical texts, as we shall demonstrate, involve readers in a firsthand engagement with the actual experimental materials. Consequently, Goethe's physics is presented in the form of a reflexive anthropological inquiry. When Jackson proposes that Goethe respecifies Newton's optical experiments, he treats this as a substantive historic accomplishment. Although his paper nicely reviews how Goethe can be understood to be respecifying Newton's experiments, in this Comment we demonstrate the possibility of such respecification both as a way of reconceptualizing an event in the history of science, and as a distinctive mode of ethnomethodological inquiry. In other words, we invite readers to work with the materials of this text in order to demonstrate the possibility of a reformed experimental field
Notes
