For a North American seeking to know the Mexican mind, and especially the sciences today and in their recent development, a great light of genius is to be found in Mexico City in the late 17th century. Tbe genius is that of one who surely may be counted as the first Mexican philosopher of nature, a nun of the Order of Saint Jerome: Sor Juana Ines de la Cruz. Sor Juana must speak for herself, from her penetrating exercise of an independent mind within a political and religious formation which denigrated women and circumscribed reason itself. To understand this world of ours, to join in an enlightenment which would be both natural and inspired, Sor Juana clearly understood the requirements of leaming, observing, logic and reasoning. In darkness foundering Words fail the troubled mind. For who, I ask, can light me When Reason is blind? Even now, after the great steps toward liberation of women, and the substantial scientific contributions toward sheer empirical awareness of both the multiple orders ofNature and the subtle aesthetics ofindividual art and social harmony, we too in the earthly world of the 20th century must affirm what she affirmed.

This volume provides a definitive assessment of the historiography of the life sciences and medicine in Latin America. It makes historiographic work available for new scholars to join the field and for graduate students and other scholars new to the history of science in Latin America, by means of meaningful and original contributions.This volume brings transnational analysis to the center of global historiographical discussions. It seeks to contribute both empirically and theoretically to the fields of History of Science and Science and Technology Studies (STS) in Latin America, to account for how the knowledge produced in developing countries is part of international knowledge as it circulates in transnational collaborative networks. The volume consists of articles written by experienced, expert authors who expose the lines of ongoing research in the history of life sciences and medicine in Latin America in order to provide an overview of the multiplicity of analytic frameworks and perspectives in a way that allows them to be contrasted with each other. Some of the topics discussed include Asymmetrical networks of collaboration, Circulation of Knowledge, Conceptual History, History and Art, History of Race, Gender and the like, and many more.

This volume attempts to provide a new articulation of issues surrounding scientific realism, scientific rationality, the epistemology of non-classical physics, the type of revolutionary changes in the development of science, the naturalization of epistemology within frameworks of cognitive science and structural linguistics, models of the information technology revolution, and reconstructions of early modern logical systems.

This volume deals with a variety of moments in the history of mechanics when conflicts arose within one textual tradition, between different traditions, or between textual traditions and the wider world of practice. Its purpose is to show how the accommodations sometimes made in the course of these conflicts ultimately contributed to the emergence of modern mechanics.

The main theme of this anthology is the unique interaction between mathematics, physics and philosophy during the beginning of the 20th century. In this book, ten renowned philosopher-historians probe insightfully into key conceptual questions of pre-quantum mathematical physics. The result is a diverse yet thematically focused compilation of first class papers on mathematics, physics and philosophy, and a source-book on the interaction between them.

Although produced in controversy, this book is not a controversial work. The calming effects of the years that have passed since the tumultuous days in Lubeck are enough to guarantee that these pages will accurately trace the coming and going of opinions, the battle for the truth and the recognition of error. In only a few passages, especially in Part Six, will one be able to tell from the tone of the book that it comes out of this struggle. For these I ask the indulgence of my reader, since they contain explanations the extent of which probably does not correspond either to the difficulty of the questions treated or to their influence. But in such passages the extent of treatment could not - as was otherwise the case - be made to depend solely on a judgment as to the value and significance of the investigations presented. There considerations of defense, more than concern for symmetry, had to determine the structure.