A New Wave in the History of Science: The Postmodern Trend

Amidst a discussion on the relationship between science and religion with my History of Science professor, several big historical names surfaced. One of those names was Andrew Dickson White, former president of Cornell University. In A History Of The Warfare Of Science With Theology In Christendom (1896), White argued that there was an inherent tension between science and Christianity, specifically during the Scientific Revolution. He was not alone in propagating this theory, and his ideas have certainly maintained a level of strength, both in academia and in popular culture.

Historians of Science, however, have generally rejected this theory and now embrace the idea that, fundamentally, there is not a contradiction while some practical manifestations of religion may not be as symbiotic with scientific progression as others. When describing this trend, I described White’s ideas as being generally discredited, in light of numerous scientists during the Scientific Revolution holding their religious beliefs to be both vital to, and in symbiosis with, their scientific pursuits [for more information on this, see Isaac Woodward’s article on the topic].

Quickly, my professor responded, “His ideas have not been discredited. They have been historicized.” Upon further probing, she explained that White’s ideas ought not be judged in comparison with what current theories espouse. Instead, the historian of science ought to evaluate ideas, theories and narratives based on their durability, that is, whether they have lasted until the present time. White’s portrayal of a violent warfare between science and religion is not inaccurate; it was simply “not durable.”

She elaborated on what she described as the postmodern trend in History of Science to “contextualize” ideas rather than probe them for nuggets of truth or reality. It is this mindset, so antithetical to the practical mindset of scientists, that will ultimately muddle the waters of the historical analysis and furthermore will fail to stimulate exciting academic dialogue. When the practice of historical analysis, especially within the realm of history of science, is so watered down that truth and fallacy have no place, we will lose the very foundation upon which we began.