Re: History of Science

[Ludwik Kowalski <KowalskiL@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU>]

John Denker wrote [in another thread]:

> -- When teaching science, we typically follow the shortest path from the
> root to the current growing tip.
> -- When teaching the history of science, if we have any semblance of
> honesty, we must discuss the dead side-branches.  This makes the history of
> science a MORE COMPLICATED and MORE CONFUSING subject than
> plain old science.  This leads to the ironic situation where lazy students
> think
> they will have an easier time if they sign up for "history of science"
> rather
> than "real science".

In my opinion elements of history of science for science majors
should be presented in the context of science courses, such as
mechanics, thermodynamics, e&m, genetics, organic chemistry,
or astronomy. A course for non-science majors should not ignore
their limitations. It should be a cultural "science appreciation"
course with a mixture of real science and real history. Serious
History of Science topics can not be developed with very limited
preparations.
Ludwik Kowalski