This crucial intervention in political epistemology offers a comprehensive discussion of the multiple applicability of Gramscian concepts and categories to the historical, sociological, and cultural analysis of science. The authors argue that the perspective of hegemony and subalternity allows us to critically assess the political directedness of scientific practices as well as to reflect on the ideological status of disciplines that deal with science at a meta-level - historical, socio-historical, and epistemological. Contributors include: Massimiliano Badino, Javier Balsa, Lino Camprubi, Ana Carneiro, Luis Miguel Carolino, Riccardo Ciavolella, Roger Cooter, Alina-Sandra Cucu, Maria Paula Diogo, Isabel Jimenez Lucena, Annelies Lannoy, Jorge Molero Mesa, Agusti Nieto-Galan, Pietro Daniel Omodeo, Matteo Realdi, Jaume Sastre-Juan, Arne Schirrmacher, Ana Simoes, Carlos Tabernero Holgado, and Carlos Ziller Camenietzki.

This volume considers contingency as a historical category resulting from the combination of various intellectual elements - epistemological, philosophical, material, as well as theological and, broadly speaking, intellectual. With contributions ranging from fields as diverse as the histories of physics, astronomy, astrology, medicine, mechanics, physiology, and natural philosophy, it explores the transformation of the notion of contingency across the late-medieval, Renaissance, and the early modern period. Underpinned by a necessitated vision of nature, seventeenth century mechanism widely identified apparent natural irregularities with the epistemological limits of a certain explanatory framework. However, this picture was preceded by, and in fact emerged from, a widespread characterization of contingency as an ontological trait of nature, typical of late-Scholastic and Renaissance science. On these bases, this volume shows how epistemological categories, which are preconditions of knowledge as "historically-situated a priori" and, seemingly, self-evident, are ultimately rooted in time. Contingency is intrinsic to scientific practice. Whether observing the behaviour of a photon, diagnosing a patient, or calculating the orbit of a distant planet, scientists face the unavoidable challenge of dealing with data that differ from their models and expectations. However, epistemological categories are not fixed in time. Indeed, there is something fundamentally different in the way an Aristotelian natural philosopher defined a wonder or a "monstrous" birth as "contingent", a modern scientist defines the unexpected result of an experiment, and a quantum physicist the behavior of a photon. Although to each inquirer these instances appeared self-evidently contingent, each also employs the concept differently.

This book is an investigation of the ideological dimensions of the disciplinary discourses on science in line with the scholarly tradition of historical epistemology. It offers a programmatic treatment of the political-epistemological problematic along three entangled lines of inquiry: socio-historical, epistemological and historiographical. The book aims for a meta-level integration of the existing scholarship on the social and cultural history of science in order to consider the ways in which struggles for hegemony have constantly informed scientific discourses. This problematic is of primary relevance for scholars in Science Studies, philosophers, historians and sociologists of science, but would also be relevant for anybody interested in scientific culture and political theory.

This book is an investigation of the ideological dimensions of the disciplinary discourses on science in line with the scholarly tradition of historical epistemology. It offers a programmatic treatment of the political-epistemological problematic along three entangled lines of inquiry: socio-historical, epistemological and historiographical. The book aims for a meta-level integration of the existing scholarship on the social and cultural history of science in order to consider the ways in which struggles for hegemony have constantly informed scientific discourses. This problematic is of primary relevance for scholars in Science Studies, philosophers, historians and sociologists of science, but would also be relevant for anybody interested in scientific culture and political theory.

In Copernicus in the Cultural Debates of the Renaissance, Pietro Daniel Omodeo presents a general overview of the reception of Copernicus's astronomical proposal from the years immediately preceding the publication of De revolutionibus (1543) to the Roman prohibition of heliocentric hypotheses in 1616. Relying on a detailed investigation of early modern sources, the author systematically examines a series of issues ranging from computation to epistemology, natural philosophy, theology and ethics. In addition to offering a pluralistic and interdisciplinary perspective on post-Copernican astronomy, the study goes beyond purely cosmological and geometrical issues and engages in a wide-ranging discussion of how Copernicus's legacy interacted with European culture and how his image and theories evolved as a result.

The supernova of 1604 marks a major turning point in the cosmological crisis of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Capturing the eyes and imagination of Europe, it ignited an explosion of ideas that forever changed the face of science. Variously interpreted as a comet or star, the new luminary brought together a broad network of scholars who debated the nature of the novelty and its origins in the universe. At the heart of the interdisciplinary discourse was Johannes Kepler, whose book On the New Star (1606) assessed the many disputes of the day. Beginning with several studies about Kepler's book, the authors of the present volume explore the place of Kepler and the 'new star' in early modern culture and religion, and how contemporary debate shaped the course of science down to the present day. Contributors are: (1) Dario Tessicini, (2) Christopher M. Graney, (3) Javier Luna, (4) Patrick J. Boner, (5) Jonathan Regier, (6) Aviva Rothman, (7) Miguel A. Granada, (8) Pietro Daniel Omodeo, (9) Matteo Cosci, and (10) William P. Blair.

This book studies the Dutch mathematician Simon Stevin (1548-1620) as a new type of 'man of knowledge'. Traditionally, Stevin is best known for his contributions to the 'Archimedean turn'. This innovative volume moves beyond this conventional image by bringing many other aspects of his work into view, by analysing the connections between the multiple strands of his thinking and by situating him in a broader European context. Like other multi-talents ('polymaths') in his time (several of whom are discussed in this volume), Stevin made an important contribution to the transformation of the ideal of knowledge in early modern Europe. This book thus provides new insights into the phenomenon of 'polymaths' in general and in the case of Stevin in particular.

This collective volume in the history of early-modern science and medicine investigates the transfer of knowledge between Germany and Scotland focusing on the Scottish mathematician and physician Duncan Liddel of Aberdeen. It offers a contextualized study of his life and work in the cultural and institutional frame of the northern European Renaissance, as well as a reconstruction of his scholarly networks and of the scientific debates in the time of post-Copernican astronomy, Melanchthonian humanism and Paracelsian controversies. Contributors are: Sabine Bertram, Duncan Cockburn, Laura Di Giammatteo, Mordechai Feingold, Karin Friedrich, Elizabeth Harding, John Henry, Richard Kirwan, Jane Pirie, Jonathan Regier.