14.01.2014 Views

2000 HSS/PSA Program 1 - History of Science Society

2000 HSS/PSA Program 1 - History of Science Society

2000 HSS/PSA Program 1 - History of Science Society

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>HSS</strong> Abstracts<br />

cosmology was wildly premature. This paper is about the debate over the maturity<br />

<strong>of</strong> astronomical data and theory, and focuses on why investigators so differed in<br />

whether they felt the time was ripe to make a science <strong>of</strong> observational cosmology.<br />

Was it a matter <strong>of</strong> field and affiliation? Of differing commitments to observation<br />

vs. theory? Of differing intellectual taste and style? The paper draws on my<br />

research into the life and work <strong>of</strong> one <strong>of</strong> the cautious optimists and pioneering<br />

theorists in galaxy evolution, Beatrice Tinsley (1941-1981).<br />

Jim Endersby University <strong>of</strong> Cambridge<br />

“From Having No Herbarium”:<br />

Local Knowledge vs. Metropolitan Expertise:<br />

Joseph Hooker’s Australasian Correspondence<br />

with William Colenso and Ronald Gunn<br />

Joseph Hooker’s Pacific floras- <strong>of</strong> New Zealand (1855) and Tasmania (1860)<br />

were partly the product <strong>of</strong> his own travels and collections in the region, but<br />

were largely compiled using the herbarium at Kew. Neither that herbarium<br />

nor the floras could have existed without the efforts <strong>of</strong> collectors based<br />

permanently in the colonies. William Colenson was one <strong>of</strong> the most<br />

significant in New Zealand, and Ronald Gunn did similarly invaluable work<br />

in Van Diemen’s Land (Tasmania). The correspondence between Hooker,<br />

Gunn and Colenso reveals complex relationships, characterised by both<br />

deference and friendship, and mediated by exchanges <strong>of</strong> plants, knowledge,<br />

and money. A central theme is a polite but <strong>of</strong>ten fierce competition over the<br />

value <strong>of</strong> their respective knowledge—the global, generalising erudition <strong>of</strong><br />

the metropolitan expert, and the local, particular expertise <strong>of</strong> the colonial<br />

collector. Sometimes sharp differences over plant taxonomy and distribution<br />

emerge from these competing interests. For example, Hooker argued that<br />

Kew’s herbarium and library gave him the sole authority to name species<br />

and determine their geographical and morphological limits, and while Gunn<br />

and Colenso largely accepted his authority, they occasionally tried to assert<br />

that their more detailed knowledge <strong>of</strong> living plants gave them unique insights<br />

into such questions. A close reading <strong>of</strong> the letters, together with an<br />

examination <strong>of</strong> Victorian botanical collecting practices, reveals a complex<br />

negotiation over the status <strong>of</strong> particular knowledge.<br />

78<br />

Nathan␣ L. Ensmenger University <strong>of</strong> Pennsylvania<br />

Chess Players, Music Lovers, and Mathematicians:<br />

Towards a Psychological Pr<strong>of</strong>ile <strong>of</strong> the Ideal Computer Scientist<br />

In the early 1950s, the academic discipline that we know today as computer<br />

science existed only as a loose association <strong>of</strong> institutions, individuals, and

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!