This is a volume of studies on the problems of theory-appraisal in the physical sciences.

It is generally believed that doing science means accumulating empirical data with no or little reference to the interpretation of the data based on the scientist’s th- retical framework or presuppositions. Holton (1969a) has deplored the widely accepted myth (experimenticism) according to which progress in science is presented as the inexorable result of the pursuit of logically sound conclusions from un- biguous experimental data. Surprisingly, some of the leading scientists themselves (Millikan is a good example) have contributed to perpetuate the myth with respect to modern science being essentially empirical, that is carefully tested experim- tal facts (free of a priori conceptions), leading to inductive generalizations. Based on the existing knowledge in a field of research a scientist formulates the guiding assumptions (Laudan et al. , 1988), presuppositions (Holton, 1978, 1998) and “hard core” (Lakatos, 1970) of the research program that constitutes the imperative of presuppositions, which is not abandoned in the face of anomalous data. Laudan and his group consider the following paraphrase of Kant by Lakatos as an important guideline: philosophy of science without history of science is empty. Starting in the 1960s, this “historical school” has attempted to redraw and replace the positivist or logical empiricist image of science that dominated for the first half of the twentieth century. Among other aspects, one that looms large in these studies is that of “guiding assumptions” and has considerable implications for the main thesis of this monograph (Chapter 2).

The Nature of Science is highly topical among science teacher educators and researchers. Increasingly, it is a mandated topic in state curriculum documents. This book draws together recent research on Nature of Science studies within a historical and philosophical framework suitable for students and teacher educators. Traditional science curricula and textbooks present science as a finished product. Taking a different approach, this book provides a glimpse of “science in the making” — scientific practice imbued with arguments, controversies, and competition among rival theories and explanations. Teaching about “science in the making” is a rich source of motivating students to engage creatively with the science curriculum. Readers are introduced to “science in the making” through discussion and analysis of a wide range of historical episodes from the early 19th century to early 21st century. Recent cutting-edge research is presented to provide insight into the dynamics of scientific progress. More than 90 studies from major science education journals, related to nature of science are reviewed. A theoretical framework, field tested with in-service science teachers, is developed for moving from ‘science in the making’ to understanding the Nature of Science.

John Servos explains the emergence of physical chemistry in America by presenting a series of lively portraits of such pivotal figures as Wilhelm Ostwald, A. A. Noyes, G. N. Lewis, and Linus Pauling, and of key institutions, including MIT, the University of California at Berkeley, and Caltech. In the early twentieth century, physical chemistry was a new hybrid science, the molecular biology of its time. The names of its progenitors were familiar to everyone who was scientifically literate; studies of aqueous solutions and of chemical thermodynamics had transformed scientific knowledge of chemical affinity. By exploring the relationship of the discipline to industry and to other sciences, and by tracing the research of its leading American practitioners, Servos shows how physical chemistry was eclipsed by its own offspring--specialties like quantum chemistry.