The reading today was an article about varying models of how science is spread among countries and colonies through imperialism. There were four main models, as well as MacLeod's own model. Each of these models had a differing view of how imperialism and science were intertwined (or even separated). These models are the instrumentalist model, the cultural independence model, Basal's diffusionist model, and Sagasti's counter-model.
Which of these models (including MacLeod's) do you most agree with? Why? What do you not agree with concerning the other models? (If you think you may have a better model describe it).
I agree most with the cultural independence model because I believe it best takes into account the cultural influences and the effect they have on science. This model allows a worldwide interpretation of the spread of science to "colonies" all over the globe. It also allows for individualism and creativity in creation of new forms of scientific study that vary from "mother" country's versions.
MacLeod's model is far too specific, which fails to take into account the spread of science to countries other than America; and Basalla's model is too clear-cut in its definition of "Western Science" leaving no room for varying forms of western science.
Posts
Personally, I liked the general model of Basal. Though, it didn't seem to take into account for the more pessimistic factors, it's simplicity inadvertently included them in the model. Where the right conditions for scientific advancement do not exist, progress cannot be made. whether the hindrance be from corruption or other influences.
ReplyDeleteThis article was an interesting read...
ReplyDeleteI agree with Conor. After reading about all the different models, I have to agree with the instrumental/cultural independence model the most.
The concept of 'colonial science' is very dynamic on many levels and in my opinion, has taken the longest of most concepts to be internationally--or universally--agreed on. Not that it is agreed on now, but this particular model incorporates all the different possibilities for the spread of different ideas.
A specific quote "...because it served 'a fundamental part of the quest for a national identity in societies...and the sense of the land correspondingly important for self awareness'" identifies that there is a difference in opinions and ideas concerning scientific ideals and that we need to agree on a platform and make sure that we all stand for the same thing.
The following quote, "because it 'coincided with the primary national purpose of mastering the environment and canvassing its economic potentialities'" also exemplifies the need for us to "nationally" come together.
This model incorporates everything that we as man need to think about. I agree with it the most!
Some thoughts,
Cara-Joy