Rhetoric & Technical Communication
Rhetoric & Technical Communication
Toscano, Aaron, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Dept. of English

Resources and Daily Activities

  • Conference Presentations
    • PCA/ACA Conference Presentation 2022
    • PCAS/ACAS Presentation 2021
    • SEACS 2021 Presentation
    • SEACS 2022 Presentation
    • SEACS 2023 Presentation
    • South Atlantic MLA Conference 2022
  • Dr. Toscano’s Homepage
  • ENGL 2116-014: Introduction to Technical Communication
    • February 13th: Introduction to User Design
    • February 15th: Instructions for Users
      • Making Résumés and Cover Letters More Effective
    • February 1st: Reflection on Workplace Messages
    • February 20th: The Rhetoric of Technology
    • February 22nd: Social Constructions of Technology
    • February 6th: Plain Language
    • January 11th: More Introduction to Class
    • January 18th: Audience & Purpose
    • January 23rd: Résumés and Cover Letters
      • Duty Format for Résumés
      • Peter Profit’s Cover Letter
    • January 25th: More on Résumés and Cover Letters
    • January 30th: Achieving a Readable Style
      • Euphemisms
      • Prose Practice for Next Class
      • Prose Revision Assignment
      • Revising Prose: Efficiency, Accuracy, and Good
      • Sentence Clarity
    • January 9th: Introduction to the Class
    • Major Assignments
    • March 13th: Introduction to Information Design
    • March 15th: More on Information Design
    • March 20th: Reporting Technical Information
    • March 27th: The Great I, Robot Analysis
  • ENGL 4182/5182: Information Design & Digital Publishing
    • August 21st: Introduction to the Course
      • Rhetorical Principles of Information Design
    • August 28th: Introduction to Information Design
      • Prejudice and Rhetoric
      • Robin Williams’s Principles of Design
    • Classmates Webpages (Fall 2017)
    • December 4th: Presentations
    • Major Assignments for ENGL 4182/5182 (Fall 2017)
    • November 13th: More on Color
      • Designing with Color
      • Important Images
    • November 20th: Extra-Textual Elements
    • November 27th: Presentation/Portfolio Workshop
    • November 6th: In Living Color
    • October 16th: Type Fever
      • Typography
    • October 23rd: More on Type
    • October 2nd: MIDTERM FUN!!!
    • October 30th: Working with Graphics
      • Beerknurd Calendar 2018
    • September 11th: Talking about Design without Using “Thingy”
      • Theory, theory, practice
    • September 18th: The Whole Document
    • September 25th: Page Design
  • ENGL 4183/5183: Editing with Digital Technologies
    • August 24th: Introduction to the Class
    • August 31st: Rhetoric, Words, and Composing
    • Major Assignments for ENGL 4183/5183 (Fall 2022)
      • Rhetoric of Fear
    • November 16th: Voice and Other Nebulous Writing Terms
      • Finding Dominant Rhetorical Appeals
    • November 2nd: Rhetorical Effects of Punctuation
    • November 30th: Words and Word Classes
    • November 9th: Cohesive Rhythm
    • October 12th: Choosing Adjectivals
    • October 19th: Choosing Nominals
    • October 26th: Stylistic Variations
    • October 5th: Midterm Exam
    • September 14th: Verb is the Word!
    • September 21st: Coordination and Subordination
    • September 28th: Form and Function
    • September 7th: Sentence Patterns
  • ENGL 4275: Rhetoric of Technology
    • April 13th: Authorities in Science and Technology
    • April 15th: Articles on Violence in Video Games
    • April 20th: Presentations
    • April 6th: Technology in the home
    • April 8th: Writing Discussion
    • Assignments for ENGL 4275
    • February 10th: Religion of Technology Part 3 of 3
    • February 12th: Is Love a Technology?
    • February 17th: Technology and Gender
    • February 19th: Technology and Expediency
    • February 24th: Semester Review
    • February 3rd: Religion of Technology Part 1 of 3
    • February 5th: Religion of Technology Part 2 of 3
    • January 13th: Technology and Meaning, a Humanist perspective
    • January 15th: Technology and Democracy
    • January 22nd: The Politics of Technology
    • January 27th: Discussion on Writing as Thinking
    • January 29th: Technology and Postmodernism
    • January 8th: Introduction to the Course
    • March 11th: Writing and Other Fun
    • March 16th: Neuromancer (1984) Day 1 of 2
    • March 18th: Neuromancer (1984) Day 2 of 2
    • March 23rd: Inception (2010)
    • March 25th: Writing and Reflecting Discussion
    • March 30th & April 1st: Count Zero
    • March 9th: William Gibson’s Neuromancer (1984)
  • ENGL 6166: Rhetorical Theory
    • April 12th: Knoblauch. Ch. 4 and Ch. 5
    • April 19th: Jacques Derrida’s Positions
    • April 26th:  Feminisms and Rhetorics
    • April 5th: Knoblauch. Ch. 3 and More Constitutive Rhetoric
    • February 15th: Isocrates (Part 2)
    • February 1st: Aristotle’s On Rhetoric Books 2 & 3
      • Aristotle’s On Rhetoric, Book 2
      • Aristotle’s On Rhetoric, Book 3
    • February 22nd: St. Augustine’s On Christian Doctrine [Rhetoric]
    • February 8th: Isocrates (Part 1)-2nd Half of Class
    • January 11th: Introduction to Class
    • January 18th: Plato’s Phaedrus
    • January 25th: Aristotle’s On Rhetoric Book 1
    • March 15th: Descartes, Rene, Discourse on Method
    • March 1st: Knoblauch. Ch. 1 and 2
    • March 22nd: Mary Wollstonecraft
    • March 29th: Second Wave Feminist Rhetoric
    • May 3rd: Knoblauch. Ch. 6, 7, and “Afterword”
    • Rhetorical Theory Assignments
  • ENGL/COMM/WRDS: The Rhetoric of Fear
    • February 14th: Fascism and Other Valentine’s Day Atrocities
    • February 21st: Fascism Part 2
    • February 7th: Fallacies Part 3 and American Politics Part 2
    • January 10th: Introduction to the Class
    • January 17th: Scapegoats & Conspiracies
    • January 24th: The Rhetoric of Fear and Fallacies Part 1
    • January 31st: Fallacies Part 2 and American Politics Part 1
    • Major Assignments
    • March 7th: Fascism Part 3
  • LBST 2212-124, 125, 126, & 127
    • August 21st: Introduction to Class
    • August 23rd: Humanistic Approach to Science Fiction
    • August 26th: Robots and Zombies
    • August 28th: Futurism, an Introduction
    • August 30th: R. A. Lafferty “Slow Tuesday Night” (1965)
    • December 2nd: Technological Augmentation
    • December 4th: Posthumanism
    • November 11th: Salt Fish Girl (Week 2)
    • November 13th: Salt Fish Girl (Week 2 con’t)
    • November 18th: The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (Part 1)
      • More Questions than Answers
    • November 1st: Games Reality Plays (part II)
    • November 20th: The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (Part 2)
    • November 6th: Salt Fish Girl (Week 1)
    • October 14th: More Autonomous Fun
    • October 16th: Autonomous Conclusion
    • October 21st: Sci Fi in the Domestic Sphere
    • October 23rd: Social Aphasia
    • October 25th: Dust in the Wind
    • October 28th: Gender Liminality and Roles
    • October 2nd: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein
    • October 30th: Games Reality Plays (part I)
    • October 9th: Approaching Autonomous
      • Analyzing Prose in Autonomous
    • September 11th: The Time Machine
    • September 16th: The Alien Other
    • September 18th: Post-apocalyptic Worlds
    • September 20th: Dystopian Visions
    • September 23rd: World’s Beyond
    • September 25th: Gender Studies and Science Fiction
    • September 30th: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein
    • September 4th: Science Fiction and Social Breakdown
      • More on Ellison
      • More on Forster
    • September 9th: The Time Machine
  • LBST 2213-110: Science, Technology, and Society
    • August 22nd: Science and Technology from a Humanistic Perspective
    • August 24th: Science and Technology, a Humanistic Approach
    • August 29th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 2
    • August 31st: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 3 and 4
    • December 5th: Video Games and Violence, a more nuanced view
    • November 14th: Boulle, Pierre. Planet of the Apes. (1964) Ch. 27-end
    • November 16th: Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. 1818. Preface-Ch. 8
    • November 21st: Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. 1818. Ch. 9-Ch. 16
    • November 28th: Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Ch. 17-Ch. 24
    • November 30th: Violence in Video Games
    • November 7th: Boulle, Pierre. Planet of the Apes Ch. 1-17
    • November 9th: Boulle, Pierre. Planet of the Apes, Ch. 18-26
    • October 12th: Lies Economics Tells
    • October 17th: Brief Histories of Medicine, Salerno, and Galen
    • October 19th: Politicizing Science and Medicine
    • October 24th: COVID-19 Facial Covering Rhetoric
    • October 26th: Wells, H. G. Time Machine. Ch. 1-5
    • October 31st: Wells, H. G. The Time Machine Ch. 6-The End
    • October 3rd: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Ch. 7 and Conclusion
    • September 12th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 7 and Conclusion
    • September 19th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Prefaces and Ch. 1
    • September 26th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Ch. 2
    • September 28th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem at Large (Technology), Ch. 5 and 6
    • September 7th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 5 and 6
  • New Media: Gender, Culture, Technology (Spring 2021)
    • April 13th: Virtually ‘Real’ Environments
    • April 20th: Rhetoric/Composition Defines New Media
    • April 27th: Sub/Cultural Politics, Hegemony, and Agency
    • April 6th: Capitalist Realism
    • February 16: Misunderstanding the Internet
    • February 23rd: Our Public Sphere and the Media
    • February 2nd: Introduction to Cultural Studies
    • January 26th: Introduction to New Media
    • Major Assignments for New Media (Spring 2021)
    • March 16th: Identity Politics
    • March 23rd: Social Construction of Gender and Sexuality
    • March 2nd: Foundational Thinkers in Cultural Studies
    • March 30th: Hyperreality
    • March 9th: Globalization & Postmodernism
    • May 4th: Wrapping Up The Semester
      • Jodi Dean “The The Illusion of Democracy” & “Communicative Capitalism”
      • Social Construction of Sexuality
  • Science Fiction in American Culture (Summer I–2020)
    • Assignments for Science Fiction in American Culture
    • Cultural Studies and Science Fiction Films
    • June 10th: Interstellar and Exploration themes
    • June 11th: Bicentennial Man
    • June 15th: I’m Only Human…Or am I?
    • June 16th: Wall-E and Environment
    • June 17th: Wall-E (2008) and Technology
    • June 18th: Interactivity in Video Games
    • June 1st: Firefly (2002) and Myth
    • June 2nd: “Johnny Mnemonic”
    • June 3rd: “New Rose Hotel”
    • June 4th: “Burning Chrome”
    • June 8th: Conformity and Monotony
    • June 9th: Cultural Constructions of Beauty
    • May 18th: Introduction to Class
    • May 19th: American Culture, an Introduction
    • May 20th: The Matrix
    • May 21st: Gender and Science Fiction
    • May 25th: Goals for I, Robot
    • May 26th: Isaac Asimov’s I, Robot
    • May 27th: Hackers and Slackers
    • May 30th: Inception
  • Teaching Portfolio
  • Topics for Analysis
    • A Practical Editing Situation
    • American Culture, an Introduction
    • Efficiency in Writing Reviews
    • Feminism, An Introduction
    • Fordism/Taylorism
    • Frankenstein Part I
    • Frankenstein Part II
    • Futurism Introduction
    • How to Lie with Statistics
    • Isaac Asimov’s “A Cult of Ignorance”
    • Langdon Winner Summary: The Politics of Technology
    • Marxist Theory (cultural analysis)
    • Oral Presentations
    • Oratory and Argument Analysis
    • Our Public Sphere
    • Postmodernism Introduction
    • Protesting Confederate Place
    • Punctuation Refresher
    • QT, the Existential Robot
    • Religion of Technology Discussion
    • Rhetoric, an Introduction
      • Analyzing the Culture of Technical Writer Ads
      • Rhetoric of Technology
      • Visual Culture
      • Visual Perception
      • Visual Perception, Culture, and Rhetoric
      • Visual Rhetoric
      • Visuals for Technical Communication
      • World War I Propaganda
    • The Great I, Robot Discussion
      • I, Robot Short Essay Topics
    • The Rhetoric of Video Games: A Cultural Perspective
      • Civilization, an Analysis
    • The Sopranos
    • Why Science Fiction?
    • Zombies and Consumption Satire
  • Video Games & American Culture
    • April 14th: Phallocentrism
    • April 21st: Video Games and Neoliberalism
    • April 7th: Video Games and Conquest
    • Assignments for Video Games & American Culture
    • February 10th: Aesthetics and Culture
    • February 17th: Narrative and Catharsis
    • February 24th: Serious Games
    • February 3rd: More History of Video Games
    • January 13th: Introduction to the course
    • January 20th: Introduction to Video Game Studies
    • January 27th: Games & Culture
      • Marxism for Video Game Analysis
      • Postmodernism for Video Game Analysis
    • March 24th: Realism, Interpretation(s), and Meaning Making
    • March 31st: Feminist Perspectives and Politics
    • March 3rd: Risky Business?

Contact Me

Office: Fretwell 255F
Email: atoscano@uncc.edu
LBST 2213-110: Science, Technology, and Society » August 29th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 2

August 29th: Collins & Pinch’s The Golem (Science), Ch. 2

Remember, your Weekly Discussion Posts #1 and #2 are due Friday by 11:00pm. I don’t accept any late posts. I assume you’ve set a weekly calendar event to remind you of this assignment.

Collins & Pinch. The Golem: Science, Ch. 2

Remember, we’re not so interested in the scientific definitions surrounding the theory of relativity; instead, we’re concerned with how scientific authority drew (assumed) decisive conclusions from experiments said to prove Einstein’s theory.

Speaking of the mythical golem, one of the most famous is the creature in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, which we’re reading in November. Her 225th birthday is tomorrow, 8/30/2022, so Happy Birthday, Mary Shelley!

What to take away from the readings

We aren’t concerned about surface details in the readings. We’re interested in epistemology and rhetoric (both terms are defined on August 22nd’s webpage). For instance, a surface detail from this reading would be that Michelson observed light rays in the late-19th Century. Likewise, another surface reading would be Eddington observed light bending by photographing stars close to the Earth. Both “readings” tell who did what by stating the narrative of events.

On the other hand, reading for epistemology and rhetoric means you consider what implications the processes for conducting the experiments had on a science. For instance, a critical reading (reading to figure out how meaning is constructed) on Michelson would be Michelson’s assumed failed experiment was used by future scientific authorities to confirm Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity. Also, Eddington’s observations proved Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity because scientific authorities (not the entirety of the scientific community) decided as a group to accept certain observations that would confirm Einstein’s theory and reject observations that didn’t confirm the theory. Scientific assumptions privileged Einstein, and those assumptions guided which observations to use (and to reject) for confirming the theory.

The extremely attuned critical thinker would conclude that regardless of which observation or experiment was used to “prove” either the Einsteinian or Newtonian theories, the Universe never changed, only our perception of it.

As I mentioned before, this class isn’t about teaching your science and technology; it’s supposed to teach you about science and technology, specifically the ways in which people communicate and believe in science. We’ll discuss this more in the future, but I want to highlight it now. You’re immersed in a prevailing culture and accept (and reject) certain ideas because of your experiences and worldviews. There are time when we might want to judge another culture negatively; however, we must understand that there are very few universal assumptions. Relativism is an important cultural studies concept that claims one can’t judge another culture based on one’s own cultural construction (doing so is called cultural imperialism). The acceptance of one’s culture is relative to on’e cultural references–one’s place in the world. However, some might be more comfortable with cultural pluralism, which states that a dominant (hegemonic) culture recognizes the value and richness of diverse subcultures within the society. Scientific schools of thought are similar because one field’s answer to a question is relative to its epistemology. This might be confusing, but, as you read, consider that the scientists and engineers mentioned are members of particular culture–social and professional. You’re trying to determine why someone might conclude a certain way. After all, aren’t facts just facts–always true?

“Relativism” can sometimes mean “anything goes,” but that’s for a longer ethical discussion beyond the scope of this course. When you approach the readings, consider contexts. Learning the “science” established isn’t as important as understanding what contexts led to particular discoveries.

Break up Ch. 2 into Two Parts

Part 1: Michelson-Morley and Miller Experiments

Take away 3 things

  1. Michelson-Morley’s experiment may prove Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, but it was after the fact—way after the fact—that that was concluded.
  2. Miller was a preeminent scientist during his time. Einstein was also famous but didn’t have the cultural status he has today. History has been good to Einstein…Miller is nearly lost to history.
  3. Miller’s interferometer results were an anomaly (in the sense they were a nuisance) that needed to be explained away. Relativity hadn’t been decisively proven, but the scientific community started believing Einstein’s theory and moved away from believing in ether conducting light.

Part 2: Eddington’s “Proof” of Relativity

Take away 3 things

  1. Eddington confirmed Einstein’s theory by choosing to use the results that fit Einstein’s theory. This is an inappropriate way to confirm results.
  2. It was extremely difficult for Eddington to have properly controlled for conditions under which to photograph the stars he used to gather data.
  3. No decisive results can be said to confirm light displacement, but important scientific organizations believed Eddington’s observations as correct—garnering the necessary support to establish scientific knowledge.

A note on observations from the Sobral and Principe expeditions and the photograph plates. We won’t go into the statistical details–standard deviations and confidence intervals–leave that to your stats class. Just remember that the Sobral 4-inch plates appeared to confirm Einstein’s theory that light would be displaced by 1.7 sec. of arc. The Astrographic plates from Sobral appeared to confirm the Newtonian prediction of 0.84 sec. of arc. Eddington (and his buddies) used the Principe plates–“the worst of all” (p. 48)–“as supporting evidence while ignoring the 18 plates taken by the Sobral astrographic” (p. 50).

In other words, although relativity is scientific law, these expeditions didn’t prove it decisively. In fact, Eddington and the Astronomer Royal selectively chose which results to use to confirm Einsteinian physics.

Pseudo Homework on Ch. 2–Reversing Einstein and Newton

Review the table on p. 49 of Collins & Pinch, and draw a conclusion based on reversing Einstein’s and Newton’s displacement calculations. Imagine if these were their estimations:

  • Newton predicts light will be displaced by the Sun’s gravitational field by 0.8 secs of an arc. {Correction from class}
  • Einstein predicts light will be displaced by the Sun’s gravitational field by 1.7 secs of an arc.
  Low BoundMeanHigh Bound
Sobral8 Good Plates (4-inch)1.7131.982.247
 18 Poor Plates (astro)0.1400.861.580
     
Principe2 poor plates0.9441.622.276

10% Confidence intervals for the observations at Sobral and Principe (p. 49)

I’m not asking you to actually do any homework you’ll turn in. The above is to get you thinking about how one’s predisposition in favor of a particular school of thought makes that person conclude differently from one who’s of another school of thought.

Key Parts of the Chapter (quotations and paraphrasing)

Aether or Ether and The Cosmos, Atmosphere, and Everything in Between

It’s important to understand that the concept of ether was a 2500-year-old belief. Scientists assumed that a substance was the conduit for light and, eventually, radio waves. Scientific papers and newspaper headlines still referenced “the ether” into the early 20th Century. Now, we refer to radio waves and light going through fields.

Scientific Authority Establishes the Theory

  • p. 27: Collins & Pinch believe that consensus about Einstein’s theory of relativity, in part, “had something to do with the ending of [World War I] and the unifying effect of science on a fractured continent.”
    • This is a humanistic perspective on science because it identifies subjective human feelings as a reason for establishing a science. The desire to consent and establish pan-European beliefs after a terrible struggle motivated belief in the theory of relativity.
  • p. 50-51: the Astronomer Royal and the Royal Society supported Eddington’s observation choices, which “proved” Einstein’s theory.
  • p. 51: “[T]here was nothing inevitable about the observations themselves until [the powers that be] had finished with their after-the-fact determinations of what the observations were taken to be.” Consensus led to which numbers to believe; decisive numbers didn’t drive the conclusions.
    • Remember, facts don’t speak for themselves; people speak for the facts, and people have biases.

Assumptions or Hypotheses are Only as Good as Your Assumptions or Hypotheses

This is circular reasoning, but the point is that it is almost impossible to stumble upon something if you don’t know what you’re looking for. Appropriate hypotheses won’t be far fetched; they’ll be within a particular range of possibilities. That range is discipline specific. A genetic engineer might hypothesize that splicing together varietals of corn would possibly lead to a plant resistant to particular fungi or blights. The genetic engineer wouldn’t hypothesize that splicing varietals of corn together would yield cans of Red Bull—that’s ridiculous.

  • p. 29: Michelson & Morley (M & M…yummy) hypothesized that the “aether wind” would increase the speed of light. That hypothesis, under the circumstances, wasn’t unreasonable. Wind currents and river currents can speed up (with the current) or slow down (against the current) the speeds of creatures or objects, phenomena that humans probably observed for millennia.
  • p. 35: In order to “properly” test the ether wind effect on the speed of light, M & M needed to control for so-called ether drag or the contours of the Earth. They had to do their experiments with good equipment and under the proper conditions.
  • p. 37-38: M & M’s 1887 interferometer “was not much use as a speedometer” for the Earth, which was their goal. It didn’t even set out to test relativity: “Only after Einstein’s famous papers were published…did the experiment become ‘retrospectively reconstructed’ as…proof of relativity.”

Dayton Miller Continues Experiments into the 1920s

  • p. 40: By 1925, Miller believed his interferometer showed the speed of the Earth to be 10 km/sec based on observing displacement {how far out of place the light is}.
    This won him “the ‘American Association for the Advancement of Science’ prize.” Many thought this disproved Einstein’s theory of relativity.
  • Timeline:
    • 1881—Michelson-Morley Experiment
    • 1887—Michelson-Morley Experiment #2, neither found what they were looking for
    • 1907—Albert Michelson wins the Nobel Prize in Physics for using instruments to analyze atmospheric forces.
    • 1921—Einstein wins Nobel Prize in Physics for establishing photoelectric effect and not for the theory of relativity.
    • 1925—Dayton Miller wins the American Association for the Advancement of Science prize for finding the Earth’s speed and disproving Einstein’s theory of relativity…or did he?
    • 1999—Einstein is Time magazine’s Man of the Century. At some point, probably gradually, the theory of special relativity became a black box—a science about which debate ceased. Culturally, Einstein is considered the (or one of the) most brilliant minds of the 20th Century.
  • p. 40-42: Collins & Pinch suggest that Miller’s ideas—even though carefully argued—weren’t accepted because a critical mass of scientists believed Einstein’s theory of special relativity.
  • p. 42: “Miller’s results were ‘just an anomaly that needed to be explained away.’”

Eddington confirms Einstein’s Prediction

We could get into lots of detail, but I want us to focus on 3 things:

  1. What was the goal of photographing stars with respect to Newtonian and Einsteinian physics?
  2. What controls or conditions had to be considered when photographing the stars to determine whether or not gravity bends light?
  3. How did Eddington confirm Einstein’s theory?
  • p. 43-44: “[A] strong gravitational field should have an effect on light rays,” and “the Einstein effect should be greater than the Newtonian effect.”
    The difference should be that light is displaced by nearly twice the distance under Einsteinian physics than Newtonian physics.
  • p. 46: In order to get accurate results, “as much as possible [had to be] kept constant between the observations and the background comparisons.”
    • Seasons of the year
    • Hot vs. cold telescopes: temperature expands and contracts the focal length of a telescope
    • Weather conditions affect what can be photographed
    • Telescopes need to move with the Earth in order to have a fixed view of a celestial body. Therefore, film exposures of 5-30 seconds (depending on the amount of light available) need to take into account the Earth’s movement.
  • p. 45: Eddington used Einstein’s prediction to choose which observations (photo plates) to use and which to discard, and, in doing so, he confirmed Einstein’s prediction. Collins & Pinch claim this is “something that no experiment can do.”

Conclusion

  • p. 45: There was agreement to agree that Eddington’s observations confirm Einstein’s predictions.
  • p. 52: The impact on culture was huge even if there was no “straightforward observational test. What we have seen are the theoretical and experimental contributions to a cultural change, a change which was just as much a licence [British spelling] for observing the world in a certain way as a consequence of those observations.”
  • p. 53: “No test [of light displacement proving the theory of special relativity] was decisive or clear cut, but taken together [the tests] acted as an overwhelming movement.”

We’re not done with relativity and cultural values. Much to the dismay of some politicians and cultural warriors, many theories of interpretation are pluralistic or relativistic in nature. What that means is that truth isn’t based on any ABSOLUTE; instead, one’s idea of truth is RELATIVE to one’s culture. In the humanities, we can argue that relativity isn’t just a cornerstone of modern physics: it allows us to consider multiple theories of interpretation. Different societies share prevailing beliefs and attitudes based on cultural assumptions reinforced by the members of that society.

Next Class

Continue with the syllabus and read Chapters 3 & 4 in Collins and Pinch. Ch. 3 gets into rushing to judgment on a science not yet proven and the policy impacts that can have—policies taxpayers may have to pay for! Ch. 4 is going to have us discussing how scientists convince others that something they can’t see exists…

Skip to toolbar
  • Log In