Science, religion and modernity
Identifieur interne : 002794 ( Istex/Curation ); précédent : 002793; suivant : 002795Science, religion and modernity
Auteurs : RBID : ISTEX:F8F93FFD874DE74EACE21044908B802342870333Abstract
There is a widespread view that the centrality of science in our culture is due to the spectacular nature of its achievements, which derive in large part from the fact that it is answerable to nothing but reason and evidence. As a consequence it is believed to be untinged by historical or cultural factors, which can therefore be ignored, making science something which in essence has no context, historical or otherwise. Science has emerged on this view because it managed to free itself from religion and because it adopted a critical, adversarial method. In reality, the situation is quite different. Religion was in the driving seat during the period of the emergence of a scientific culture in the West, and it was always history rather than science that posed the threat to religion. Moreover, a commitment to critical, adversarial method was often rejected as argument for its sake in the crucial early development of science. A more balanced and informed view of just what happened is called for.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8705.2005.00663.x
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Istex, to step Corpus: Pour aller vers cette notice dans l'étape Curation :002794
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:F8F93FFD874DE74EACE21044908B802342870333Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>Science, religion and modernity</title><author><name sortKey="Gaukroger, Stephen" uniqKey="Gaukroger S">STEPHEN GAUKROGER</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:F8F93FFD874DE74EACE21044908B802342870333</idno><date when="2005">2005</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1467-8705.2005.00663.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/F8F93FFD874DE74EACE21044908B802342870333/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">002794</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">002794</idno></publicationStmt><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0011-1562</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="eng">There is a widespread view that the centrality of science in our culture is due to the spectacular nature of its achievements, which derive in large part from the fact that it is answerable to nothing but reason and evidence. As a consequence it is believed to be untinged by historical or cultural factors, which can therefore be ignored, making science something which in essence has no context, historical or otherwise. Science has emerged on this view because it managed to free itself from religion and because it adopted a critical, adversarial method. In reality, the situation is quite different. Religion was in the driving seat during the period of the emergence of a scientific culture in the West, and it was always history rather than science that posed the threat to religion. Moreover, a commitment to critical, adversarial method was often rejected as argument for its sake in the crucial early development of science. A more balanced and informed view of just what happened is called for.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><copyrightdate>2005</copyrightdate><author><json:item><name>STEPHEN GAUKROGER</name></json:item></author><genre><json:string>Serial article</json:string></genre><host><genre></genre><language></language><issn><json:string>0011-1562</json:string></issn><title>Critical Quarterly</title><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8705</json:string></doi></host><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><abstract>There is a widespread view that the centrality of science in our culture is due to the spectacular nature of its achievements, which derive in large part from the fact that it is answerable to nothing but reason and evidence. As a consequence it is believed to be untinged by historical or cultural factors, which can therefore be ignored, making science something which in essence has no context, historical or otherwise. Science has emerged on this view because it managed to free itself from religion and because it adopted a critical, adversarial method. In reality, the situation is quite different. Religion was in the driving seat during the period of the emergence of a scientific culture in the West, and it was always history rather than science that posed the threat to religion. Moreover, a commitment to critical, adversarial method was often rejected as argument for its sake in the crucial early development of science. A more balanced and informed view of just what happened is called for.</abstract><title>Science, religion and modernity</title><pubdate>2005-12</pubdate><doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1467-8705.2005.00663.x</json:string></doi><id>F8F93FFD874DE74EACE21044908B802342870333</id><fulltext><json:item><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><extension>pdf</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/F8F93FFD874DE74EACE21044908B802342870333/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><extension>zip</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/F8F93FFD874DE74EACE21044908B802342870333/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><extension>txt</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/F8F93FFD874DE74EACE21044908B802342870333/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/F8F93FFD874DE74EACE21044908B802342870333/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader type="text"><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="alt" xml:lang="">Science, religion and modernity</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><availability><p>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</p></availability><date>2005-12-02</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="">Science, religion and modernity</title><author><persName><forename type="first">STEPHEN</forename><surname>GAUKROGER</surname></persName></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Critical Quarterly</title><idno type="pISSN">0011-1562</idno><idno type="eISSN">1467-8705</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8705</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2005-12"></date><biblScope unit="vol">47</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="1">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="31">31</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">F8F93FFD874DE74EACE21044908B802342870333</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1467-8705.2005.00663.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">CRIQ663</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2005-12-02</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>There is a widespread view that the centrality of science in our culture is due to the spectacular nature of its achievements, which derive in large part from the fact that it is answerable to nothing but reason and evidence. As a consequence it is believed to be untinged by historical or cultural factors, which can therefore be ignored, making science something which in essence has no context, historical or otherwise. Science has emerged on this view because it managed to free itself from religion and because it adopted a critical, adversarial method. In reality, the situation is quite different. Religion was in the driving seat during the period of the emergence of a scientific culture in the West, and it was always history rather than science that posed the threat to religion. Moreover, a commitment to critical, adversarial method was often rejected as argument for its sake in the crucial early development of science. A more balanced and informed view of just what happened is called for.</p></abstract></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2005-12-02">Created</change><change when="2005-12">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley component found"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisherName><publisherLoc>Oxford, UK</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8705</doi><issn type="print">0011-1562</issn><issn type="electronic">1467-8705</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="CRIQ"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="CRITICAL QUARTERLY">Critical Quarterly</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="12004"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/criq.2005.47.issue-4</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="47">47</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="4">4</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2005-12">December 2005</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="2" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1467-8705.2005.00663.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="CRIQ663"></id><id type="supplier" value="663"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="31"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">CRITICISM</title></titleGroup><eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2005-12-02"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2005-12-02"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.2 mode:FullText source:Header result:Header" date="2010-03-08"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-16"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-17"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="1">1</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="31">31</numbering></numberingGroup><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:CRIQ.CRIQ663.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="0"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="0"></count><count type="formulaTotal" number="0"></count><count type="referenceTotal" number="10"></count><count type="wordTotal" number="1596"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="83"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">Science, religion and modernity</title><title type="short">Science, religion and modernity</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1"><personName><givenNames>STEPHEN</givenNames><familyName>GAUKROGER</familyName></personName></creator></creators><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p>There is a widespread view that the centrality of science in our culture is due to the spectacular nature of its achievements, which derive in large part from the fact that it is answerable to nothing but reason and evidence. As a consequence it is believed to be untinged by historical or cultural factors, which can therefore be ignored, making science something which in essence has no context, historical or otherwise. Science has emerged on this view because it managed to free itself from religion and because it adopted a critical, adversarial method. In reality, the situation is quite different. Religion was in the driving seat during the period of the emergence of a scientific culture in the West, and it was always history rather than science that posed the threat to religion. Moreover, a commitment to critical, adversarial method was often rejected as argument for its sake in the crucial early development of science. A more balanced and informed view of just what happened is called for.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.5"><titleInfo><title>Science, religion and modernity</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>Science, religion and modernity</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative"><title>Science, religion and modernity</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">STEPHEN</namePart><namePart type="family">GAUKROGER</namePart><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre>Serial article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford, UK</placeTerm></place><dateCreated encoding="w3cdtf">2005-12-02</dateCreated><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2005-12</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2005</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="eng">There is a widespread view that the centrality of science in our culture is due to the spectacular nature of its achievements, which derive in large part from the fact that it is answerable to nothing but reason and evidence. As a consequence it is believed to be untinged by historical or cultural factors, which can therefore be ignored, making science something which in essence has no context, historical or otherwise. Science has emerged on this view because it managed to free itself from religion and because it adopted a critical, adversarial method. In reality, the situation is quite different. Religion was in the driving seat during the period of the emergence of a scientific culture in the West, and it was always history rather than science that posed the threat to religion. Moreover, a commitment to critical, adversarial method was often rejected as argument for its sake in the crucial early development of science. A more balanced and informed view of just what happened is called for.</abstract><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Critical Quarterly</title></titleInfo><identifier type="ISSN">0011-1562</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1467-8705</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8705</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">CRIQ</identifier><part><date>2005</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>47</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>4</number></detail></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">F8F93FFD874DE74EACE21044908B802342870333</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1467-8705.2005.00663.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">CRIQ663</identifier><part><extent unit="pages"><start>1</start><end>31</end><total>31</total></extent><extent unit="references"><total>10</total></extent><extent unit="words"><total>1596</total></extent></part><recordInfo><recordOrigin>WILEY</recordOrigin><recordContentSource>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Linguistique/explor/CharterV3/Data/Istex/Curation
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 002794 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Curation/biblio.hfd -nk 002794 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Linguistique
|area= CharterV3
|flux= Istex
|étape= Curation
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:F8F93FFD874DE74EACE21044908B802342870333
|texte= Science, religion and modernity
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.07. |  |