Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought: Kepler to Einstein by Gerald Holton (review)

(~LTRRENT LITERATl' RE I. Book Reviews THEMATIC ORIGINS OF SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT: KEPLER TO EINSTEIN by Gerald Holton. Rev. Ed. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, U.S.A., 1988.499 pp. Paper, $12.95. ISBN Q-674-8774~9. Reviewed byDavid Topper, History Department , University of Winnepeg, Winnepeg, Manitoba, R3B 2E9, Canada. When a book as important as Gerald Holton's Thematic Originsof Scientific Thoughtis revised, it should be noted in the major relevantjournals. Since its publication in 1973, Holton's book has been a source of insight to many students of science history; particularly significant have been the penetrating essays on Einstein's thought and the fertile concept of themata in science. The 1973 edition of Thematic Origins was, in fact, the first of three collections of essays by Holton. The second volume, The Scientific Imagination (1978), I reviewed elsewhere [l]. The third volume, TheAdvancementof Science and its Burdens(1986), I recently reviewed in this journal [2]. In the revised edition of Thematic Origins Holton deletes some of the material from the first edition. Thus the previous last three essays are replaced by one essay, "Niels Bohr and the Integrity of Science", which should be required reading for science students in graduate school. Holton presents Bohr as an exemplar of the honorable scientist, one who devoted himself to "the obstinate search for truths that will lead to a more coherent scientic picture of the world" and the application of his "God-given reason and intuitions to the job of making the world a saner place" (p. 460). Unfortunately, two of the deleted essays were still worthy of inclusion: one on allegory in science (with some reference to allegory in art) and the other on various contemporary images (mainly misconceptions ) of science. In this revised edition there is also an additional essay, "On the Hesitant Rise of Quantum Physics Research in the United 1C>19891SAST Pergamon Press pic.Printed inGreat Britain. oo24-094X/8953.oo+0.oo States", which is primarily upon the role of Edwin C. Kemble. Otherwise, there are few changes of substance. The Introduction has been modified slightly, but it still remains probably the best introduction to Holton's concept of themata. As he writes, metaphorically speaking there are three philosophical dimensions to science: (1) "propositions concerning empirical matters of fact"; (2) "propositions concerning logic and mathematics " (p. 10); and (3) the dimension of thernata, of those fundamental conceptions of a stable and widely diffused kind that are not resolvable into or derivable from observation and analytic ratiocination. They are often found in the initial or continuing motivation of the scientist's actual work, and also in the end product to which his work reaches out ... [T] he study of the rise or fall of a thematic preoccupation is among the most interesting problems for the historian. Some thernata grow slowly, as the result of a sequence of local successes--e.g., the thema of strict conservation ... Some thematic concepts found their place more rapidly ... e.g., the concept of a causal, mechanistic universe Other themata have atrophied such as macrocosmic -microcosmic correspondence ... (pp. 13-14). Finally, Holton has added a "Postscript ", which is essentially an annotated bibliography on relevant material published since the first edition. A large part of this bibliography is devoted to Holton's now-classic article "Einstein, Michelson, and the 'Crucial' Experiment" (first published in 1969 and reprinted in both editions of Thematic Origins),in which he argued that the famed MichelsonMorley experiment probably had little influence on the genesis of the special theory ofrelativity (1905)contrary to virtually all textbooks on the subject. I can still remember being awestruck when I first read this essay as a graduate student almost 20 years ago. I am pleased to report that the essay has stood the test of timedespite the publication in 1982 of an apparently contradictory 'document' [3]. Holton correctly dismisses this (p. 479), since clearly it is not a primary source. Unfortunately, the 'document' was used as a basis for revising the Michelson-Morley myth in Abraham Pais's otherwise admirable and important biography of Einstein [4]. Fortunately, as Holton notes, his essay has had an impact in some important circles, for he...