The science of chemistry has undergone two major transformative changes during the early modern period, both closely related to two of the most revolutionary episodes in the history of Western science. The dissertation consists of a historical-analytical comparative exploration of early modern chemical thought and practice based on two series of interconnected case studies related, respectively, to the seventeenth-century Scientific Revolution and the eighteenth-century Chemical Revolution. Although rarely considered together in the context of the history of chemistry, during both Revolutions, similar forces combined to generate crises in chemical knowledge and practice, to use a well-known Kuhnian notion. Differences in nature and historical evolution notwithstanding, both instances featured attempts at quantification and physicalist reductions of chemistry: during the 1660s-1680s Boyle advanced a reconciliation of chymical experimental knowledge with the budding mechanical philosophy, predicated upon the physically governed laws of matter and motion; during the last third of the eighteenth-century, Lavoisier (et al.) submitted chemical phenomena to the ‘rule of the balance’, as a part of an all-encompassing experimentalist, theoretical and linguistic reformation anchored in the conservation of weight principle. Concerned with the ‘losers’ (the chemists par excellence) rather than the ‘winners’, the study analyzes the reactions of leading contemporary chemists. Part I explores a critique of Boyle’s experimental philosophy and mechanist agendas conducted by French Royal Academician Samuel C. Duclos (1598-1685). In face of what he perceived as the unwarranted mechanical reduction of chymistry, Duclos set out to rehabilitate traditional chemical philosophy, drawing upon Paracelsian and Helmontian notions. This critique (1667-68) sparked a lengthy debate over cohesion and coagulation between academicians of diverging chymical and physical persuasions, culminating in the 1669 dispute over pesanteur and gravity. Part II examines Joseph Priestley’s and Richard Kirwan’s defenses of phlogistic chemistry and their respective versions of chemical experimentalism, followed by a broader contextualizing inquiry into the nature of the metaphysical, epistemological and rhetorical commitments that were defended under the banner of the phlogistic chemical worldview during the late stages of the Chemical Revolution. The category of Style of Experimental Reasoning (SER)—derived from A. C. Crombie and I. Hacking—is introduced, developed and used for capturing salient features of early modern chemical knowledge as it was dynamically molded at the confluence of discourse and practice. In contrasting contemporary chemists’ reactions to the physicalist challenges, the two revolutionary episodes mutually illuminate each other; the category of SER affords a reconstruction of the chemists’ unique realm of action and subsequent production of chemical knowledge. Inquiring into the dialectics of continuity-versus-discontinuity between the two perceived Revolutions, the study redraws the line between the ‘chymical’ and the ‘physical’, providing a new understanding of the metaphysical and experimental complexities involved in the birth of modern chemistry.

The science of chemistry has undergone two major transformative changes during the early modern period, both closely related to two of the most revolutionary episodes in the history of Western science. The dissertation consists of a historical-analytical comparative exploration of early modern chemical thought and practice based on two series of interconnected case studies related, respectively, to the seventeenth-century Scientific Revolution and the eighteenth-century Chemical Revolution. Although rarely considered together in the context of the history of chemistry, during both Revolutions, similar forces combined to generate crises in chemical knowledge and practice, to use a well-known Kuhnian notion. Differences in nature and historical evolution notwithstanding, both instances featured attempts at quantification and physicalist reductions of chemistry: during the 1660s-1680s Boyle advanced a reconciliation of chymical experimental knowledge with the budding mechanical philosophy, predicated upon the physically governed laws of matter and motion; during the last third of the eighteenth-century, Lavoisier (et al.) submitted chemical phenomena to the ‘rule of the balance’, as a part of an all-encompassing experimentalist, theoretical and linguistic reformation anchored in the conservation of weight principle. Concerned with the ‘losers’ (the chemists par excellence) rather than the ‘winners’, the study analyzes the reactions of leading contemporary chemists. Part I explores a critique of Boyle’s experimental philosophy and mechanist agendas conducted by French Royal Academician Samuel C. Duclos (1598-1685). In face of what he perceived as the unwarranted mechanical reduction of chymistry, Duclos set out to rehabilitate traditional chemical philosophy, drawing upon Paracelsian and Helmontian notions. This critique (1667-68) sparked a lengthy debate over cohesion and coagulation between academicians of diverging chymical and physical persuasions, culminating in the 1669 dispute over pesanteur and gravity. Part II examines Joseph Priestley’s and Richard Kirwan’s defenses of phlogistic chemistry and their respective versions of chemical experimentalism, followed by a broader contextualizing inquiry into the nature of the metaphysical, epistemological and rhetorical commitments that were defended under the banner of the phlogistic chemical worldview during the late stages of the Chemical Revolution. The category of Style of Experimental Reasoning (SER)—derived from A. C. Crombie and I. Hacking—is introduced, developed and used for capturing salient features of early modern chemical knowledge as it was dynamically molded at the confluence of discourse and practice. In contrasting contemporary chemists’ reactions to the physicalist challenges, the two revolutionary episodes mutually illuminate each other; the category of SER affords a reconstruction of the chemists’ unique realm of action and subsequent production of chemical knowledge. Inquiring into the dialectics of continuity-versus-discontinuity between the two perceived Revolutions, the study redraws the line between the ‘chymical’ and the ‘physical’, providing a new understanding of the metaphysical and experimental complexities involved in the birth of modern chemistry.

Propelled by a desire to understand natural language, American linguists of the postwar period brought the tools of the era to bear on the study of syntax: computer science, math- ematical graph theory, and even Cold War strategy. Three syntactic theories were enun- ciated, each trying to untangle the mysteries of our ability to form and use sentences. These theories interacted on a nearly daily basis, influencing and challenging each other through the s. By the end of the decade, one had established clear dominance: Noam Chomsky’s theory, developed at . Combining contemporary history of science tools with linguistics-specific concepts, this study explores the dynamics of the syntactic theory- choice debates from  to . I argue that these debates can only be fully understood through a confluence of four themes: explanation, pedagogy, knowledge transmission, and lay linguistics. Together, these themes explain how linguists selected and evaluated theories, how students were trained to think about and use syntax, how ideas and people spread across the United States, and how academic theories played out in peripheral disci- plines. They also resolve the central paradox running through this study: how did Noam Chomsky’s theory – a theory whose proponents valued the private transmission of un- derground knowledge and actively prevented outsiders from accessing research – spread across the country and gain a majority of supporters? By paying particular attention to the ideas and problems which mattered to the linguists of the time, this study presents a critical and novel history of postwar American linguistics. In doing so, it rectifies the lack of a balanced, historically-informed account of the discipline. What little literature exists on the history of syntax in America bears the imprint of Whig interpretations: it omits the rival syntactic theories which competed with Chomsky’s theory, the technical linguistics debates of the period, and pedagogy and the training of young linguists. Most impor- tantly, it cannot account for the paradox of private knowledge. This study contributes to our historical understanding by both providing the first history of science based investiga- tion of postwar American syntax and showcasing a powerful way of investigating theory development, theory choice, and theory change.

Propelled by a desire to understand natural language, American linguists of the postwar period brought the tools of the era to bear on the study of syntax: computer science, math- ematical graph theory, and even Cold War strategy. Three syntactic theories were enun- ciated, each trying to untangle the mysteries of our ability to form and use sentences. These theories interacted on a nearly daily basis, influencing and challenging each other through the s. By the end of the decade, one had established clear dominance: Noam Chomsky’s theory, developed at . Combining contemporary history of science tools with linguistics-specific concepts, this study explores the dynamics of the syntactic theory- choice debates from  to . I argue that these debates can only be fully understood through a confluence of four themes: explanation, pedagogy, knowledge transmission, and lay linguistics. Together, these themes explain how linguists selected and evaluated theories, how students were trained to think about and use syntax, how ideas and people spread across the United States, and how academic theories played out in peripheral disci- plines. They also resolve the central paradox running through this study: how did Noam Chomsky’s theory – a theory whose proponents valued the private transmission of un- derground knowledge and actively prevented outsiders from accessing research – spread across the country and gain a majority of supporters? By paying particular attention to the ideas and problems which mattered to the linguists of the time, this study presents a critical and novel history of postwar American linguistics. In doing so, it rectifies the lack of a balanced, historically-informed account of the discipline. What little literature exists on the history of syntax in America bears the imprint of Whig interpretations: it omits the rival syntactic theories which competed with Chomsky’s theory, the technical linguistics debates of the period, and pedagogy and the training of young linguists. Most impor- tantly, it cannot account for the paradox of private knowledge. This study contributes to our historical understanding by both providing the first history of science based investiga- tion of postwar American syntax and showcasing a powerful way of investigating theory development, theory choice, and theory change.

This thesis details and analyzes the interaction between computers and science in a particular case. The case is the career of Wallace J. Eckert (1902-1971). Eckert was a professor of astronomy at Columbia University and scientific researcher for IBM. He has received some attention in the history of computing for his significant work in machine computation in the 1930s and 1940s and was the foremost expert on lunar theory for much of his life. First the existing secondary literature on the subject is discussed. Eckert's work has rarely been the focus of sustained historical scrutiny, but the question of the relation of science and the computer has received more scholarship in the history, philosophy and sociology of science. The main narrative of the thesis begins with the history of the various mathematical techniques and external aids to computation used over the course of the history of celestial mechanics. Having set the context, Eckert's early life and career is detailed up until 1945. Here, before the modern computer as such was developed, Eckert innovated by adapting IBM punched card machines to astronomical applications. Next Eckert's time as a scientific researcher employed by IBM after 1945 is detailed. Here he helped establish a culture of scientific research at IBM, demonstrated the value of IBM's products for science, aided in the development of new more complex machine designs including electronic systems and continued his own astronomical research. Eckert's major projects on electronic machines are described, especially those in lunar theory, with explanation of how his astronomical methods remained the same or were modified and expanded by later electronic machines and how he innovated with the machines at his disposal. In the conclusion, after summarizing later developments in celestial mechanics, broader questions about the modern computer's role in science are engaged. Continuity between pre and post computer methods is well illustrated by Eckert's work. His work also shows that while the computer was a force for change in celestial mechanics, the form of that change depended on the choices, resources and practices of the people using it.

This thesis details and analyzes the interaction between computers and science in a particular case. The case is the career of Wallace J. Eckert (1902-1971). Eckert was a professor of astronomy at Columbia University and scientific researcher for IBM. He has received some attention in the history of computing for his significant work in machine computation in the 1930s and 1940s and was the foremost expert on lunar theory for much of his life. First the existing secondary literature on the subject is discussed. Eckert's work has rarely been the focus of sustained historical scrutiny, but the question of the relation of science and the computer has received more scholarship in the history, philosophy and sociology of science. The main narrative of the thesis begins with the history of the various mathematical techniques and external aids to computation used over the course of the history of celestial mechanics. Having set the context, Eckert's early life and career is detailed up until 1945. Here, before the modern computer as such was developed, Eckert innovated by adapting IBM punched card machines to astronomical applications. Next Eckert's time as a scientific researcher employed by IBM after 1945 is detailed. Here he helped establish a culture of scientific research at IBM, demonstrated the value of IBM's products for science, aided in the development of new more complex machine designs including electronic systems and continued his own astronomical research. Eckert's major projects on electronic machines are described, especially those in lunar theory, with explanation of how his astronomical methods remained the same or were modified and expanded by later electronic machines and how he innovated with the machines at his disposal. In the conclusion, after summarizing later developments in celestial mechanics, broader questions about the modern computer's role in science are engaged. Continuity between pre and post computer methods is well illustrated by Eckert's work. His work also shows that while the computer was a force for change in celestial mechanics, the form of that change depended on the choices, resources and practices of the people using it.

“Ambassadors of Pleasure” examines the social and cultural history of ‘sin’ in the Detroit-Windsor border region during the post-World War II period. It employs the interrelated frameworks of “borderlands” and “vice” in order to identify the complex ways in which illicit economies shaped—and were shaped by—these border cities. It argues that illicit economies served multiple purposes for members of local borderlands communities. For many downtown residents, vice industries provided important forms of leisure, labor, and diversion in cities undergoing rapid changes. Deeply rooted in local working-class communities, prostitution and heroin economies became intimately intertwined in the daily lives of many local residents who relied on them for both entertainment and income. For others, though, anti-vice activities offered a concrete way to engage in what they perceived as community betterment. Fighting the immoral influences of prostitution and drug use was one way some residents, particularly those of the middle class, worked to improve their local communities in seemingly tangible ways. These struggles for control over vice economies highlight the ways in which shifting meanings of race, class, and gender, growing divisions between urban centers and suburban regions, and debates over the meaning of citizenship evolved in the urban borderland. This dissertation subsequently traces the competing interests brought together through illicit vice activities, arguing that they provide unique insight into the fracturing social lines developing in the postwar North American cities.

In this thesis, I present a novel account of scientific modeling that achieves the stability and generalizability of static approaches with the flexibility and practical relevance of diachronic approaches. In this account, modeling is characterized by the use of a similarity relation for the purpose of surrogate reasoning. Many criticisms of similarity are based on the fact that there is no way to objectively assess similarity between two things that share some, but not all, features. This account does not rely on the inherently flawed notion of objectively assessing similarity. Instead, the focus is on subjective assessment of similarity, within the specific context of an agent using the similarity for surrogate reasoning. This account captures the diversity of models while providing coherence among common features and functions, as evidenced by application to a series of interrelated examples in a case study from mid-twentieth century cognitive psychology. The similarity/difference account advocated in this thesis is particularly significant because its demonstrated success, evidenced by the case study, dispels several misconceptions about the study of scientific models. Advocates of static approaches claim that a diachronic approach cannot provide the generalizability necessary for a unified account, but the functional and agent-oriented similarity/difference account proves otherwise. Advocates of practice-based approaches often suggest that imilarity is too restrictive to capture the diversity of scientific models, but the similarity/difference account demonstrates that this concern only applies to a radically naturalized concept of similarity. As part of an agent-oriented account, a non-naturalized concept of similarity can be flexible enough to capture the full range of scientific models. Combining a diachronic approach with the similarity relation usually associated with static approaches results in an account that can circumvent the issues usually associated with either diachronic approaches or similarity alone.

This historical study focuses on the multilateral regulation of sugar to provide a broader institutional history of trade law. I argue that theories of development and tensions between the global North and South have always been central to the formation, function, and transformation of international trade institutions. Sugar consistently appears as a commodity throughout the history of modern trade law. The sugar trade provides an immediate way for us to work through larger questions of development, free trade, and economic world order. I examine the 1902 Brussels Sugar Convention, the 1937 International Sugar Agreement (ISA), and the 1977 ISA. These international agreements provide a narrative of the development ideas and concerns that were a central feature of the trade institutions that preceded the World Trade Organization. In the context of the sugar trade over the last century, very few challenged the idea of free trade. Instead, they debated over what free trade meant. The justification for free trade and the function of those international institutions charged to implement trade agreements has changed throughout history. Yet, despite multiple historical and doctrinal definitions of free trade, two dynamics remain consistent: trade law has always been configured by the relationship between policies of tariff reduction and market stabilization and has been defined by the tension between industrial and agricultural interests.

In this thesis, I present a novel account of scientific modeling that achieves the stability and generalizability of static approaches with the flexibility and practical relevance of diachronic approaches. In this account, modeling is characterized by the use of a similarity relation for the purpose of surrogate reasoning. Many criticisms of similarity are based on the fact that there is no way to objectively assess similarity between two things that share some, but not all, features. This account does not rely on the inherently flawed notion of objectively assessing similarity. Instead, the focus is on subjective assessment of similarity, within the specific context of an agent using the similarity for surrogate reasoning. This account captures the diversity of models while providing coherence among common features and functions, as evidenced by application to a series of interrelated examples in a case study from mid-twentieth century cognitive psychology. The similarity/difference account advocated in this thesis is particularly significant because its demonstrated success, evidenced by the case study, dispels several misconceptions about the study of scientific models. Advocates of static approaches claim that a diachronic approach cannot provide the generalizability necessary for a unified account, but the functional and agent-oriented similarity/difference account proves otherwise. Advocates of practice-based approaches often suggest that imilarity is too restrictive to capture the diversity of scientific models, but the similarity/difference account demonstrates that this concern only applies to a radically naturalized concept of similarity. As part of an agent-oriented account, a non-naturalized concept of similarity can be flexible enough to capture the full range of scientific models. Combining a diachronic approach with the similarity relation usually associated with static approaches results in an account that can circumvent the issues usually associated with either diachronic approaches or similarity alone.