JOURNAL ARTICLE
The Peculiar Illumination of the Polymathic Mind: Mary Somerville, William Whewell, and the Disciplinary Formation of the Sciences.
Published In: New Literary History, 2023, v. 54, n. 3. P. 1361 1 of 3
Database: Academic Search Ultimate 2 of 3
Authored By: Neeley, Kathryn A. 3 of 3
Abstract
Mary Somerville (1780-1872) and William Whewell (1794-1866) both contributed to the disciplinary formation of the sciences in Great Britain in the nineteenth century: she as a synthesizer who connected the various branches of knowledge in the emerging physical sciences, and he as the first person who used the history of all branches of science to define what distinguished scientific knowledge from other kinds. Both published bodies of scholarly work whose volume and breadth astounded their contemporaries and seem almost unimaginable today. Neither is included in standard histories of science because neither made the kind of original discovery around which those histories are organized. They become much easier to comprehend in the context of polymathy, which recognizes discerning and illuminating coherence in large bodies of knowledge as an exceptional but essential creative act. Their writings reveal the adeptness of the polymathic mind in framing large bodies of knowledge through two rhetorical moves: (1) association, which connects the subject with commonly held assumptions and values and draws on aesthetic traditions that have emotional resonance; and (2) orientation, which provides organizing ideas and conceptual frameworks that establish the coherence of the subject matter and guide the reader through the text. The distinctively anti-disciplinary approach of Somerville and the fluid nature of the disciplinary categories Whewell used to organize his history suggest that the world of knowledge, including science, has never been divided into the territorial disciplinary structures that dominate higher education. Like polymaths collectively, Somerville and Whewell are apparent anomalies whose very existence challenges our notions about the role and value of specialization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Additional Information
- Source:New Literary History. 2023/07, Vol. 54, Issue 3, p1361
- Document Type:Article
- Subject Area:History
- Publication Date:2023
- ISSN:0028-6087
- DOI:10.1353/nlh.2023.a917056
- Accession Number:174796257
- Copyright Statement:Copyright of New Literary History is the property of Johns Hopkins University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Looking to go deeper into this topic? Look for more articles on EBSCOhost.