Alfred Russel Wallace, whose independent discovery of natural selection prompted Charles Darwin to publish his magnum opus, On the Origin of Species, is perhaps better remembered for his contributions to biogeography than evolutionary theory. His namesake, the Wallace Line, delineates an abrupt and curious intangible boundary that separates Australian fauna from Asian Fauna. While one continent's fauna are often highly distinct from the other continent's fauna, their distinctiveness is relative to the vast oceanic or latitudinal separation. In contrast, Asia and Australia are connected by a string of contiguous islands that could presumably allow for a gradient of species dispersal. Counterintuitive to the understanding of naturalists in the 19th century and beyond, the patterns of flora and fauna on the adjacent islands in the Australasian Archipelago are so remarkably different that the area cannot be treated as one single biogeographic region, nor can it be seen as a transition state. Wallace observed this, and attempted to sketch the line that marked the distinct separation. This line created a controversial outflow of opinions, well into the twentieth century, based on the exact delineation of the faunal barrier. Research concerning the biogeographic region's internal and external boundaries continues in a diversity of fields and subfields. Wallace's namesake and publications on the Malay Archipelago, its natural productions, biogeography, and conceptions of the natural world drew envy, ire, admiration and respect. His synthesis and integration of fields created an empire of science based on one region, due to that region's tropical diversity, that propelled science forward immensely, for better or worse, and deserves recognition for his immense contributions to the pursuit of scientific knowledge- an intellectual Wallace Line. / A Thesis submitted to the Program of History and Philosophy of Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. / Spring Semester, 2014. / March 31, 2014. / Biogeography, Evolution, Wallace, Wallacea, Wallace Line / Includes bibliographical references. / Frederick R. Davis, Professor Directing Thesis; Michael Ruse, Committee Member; Meegan Kennedy Hanson, Committee Member.

This project examines prominent nineteenth century scientists who operated from—and alongside—the Smithsonian Institution. By examining archival correspondence, reports, and financial records, as well as contemporary news sources and secondary books and journals, I found that these individuals operated beyond the scientific community as public intellectuals. It is my assertion that these individuals functioned as "representatives of science" to the American public, while harnessing their status to establish America's place on the international scientific scene. Of specific interest is the process by which famed ichthyologist and curator Spencer Fullerton Baird, and his successor George Brown Goode, utilized their dual positions at the Smithsonian and as heads of the U.S. Fish Commission to establish themselves as scientific emissaries to the domestic and international publics. Ichthyology projects and collections at the Smithsonian became internationally coveted under their supervision, and the exhibits these men constructed at various International Exhibitions—which won numerous awards— were direct vectors for global public outreach. This study also reveals the crucial importance of Solomon G. Brown, the first black employee at the Smithsonian and assistant to three Secretaries, as well as a public intellectual himself. Beyond his duties at the Institution, Brown was extremely active in the black community of D.C., giving scientific talks and playing an active role in his local D.C. community. / A Thesis submitted to the Program in the History and Philosophy of Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. / Spring Semester 2016. / April 13, 2016. / George Brown Goode, Joseph Henry, public intellectual, Smithsonian, Solomon Brown, Spencer Baird / Includes bibliographical references. / Ronald E. Doel, Professor Directing Thesis; Kristine C. Harper, Committee Member; James Clark, Committee Member.

This is a study of the strategic and tactical use of ironclad warships during the American Civil War. The project seeks to examine why the naval administration on both sides (led by Gideon Welles for the Union and Stephen Mallory for the Confederacy) decided to give such vessels an opportunity in combat, their reaction to early operations (such as the famous battle at Hampton Roads on 8-9 March 1862), and how they learned to deploy the ships as the war progressed--accounting for difficulties with terrain, fortified opposition, learning curve for personnel, and weaknesses of the weapon system technology. The study also encompasses history of science and technology concepts such as gatekeeper theory and social construction of technology. The military gatekeepers, Union and Confederate, had to adopt weapons that suited their strategic needs as a part of their overall objective. The Confederate's need to maintain open ports and fend off the Union Navy's superior numbers made superior quality of ships a viable recourse. The Union's need to defeat the Confederate Navy, including overcoming any of the South's technological leaps, made inclusion of ironclad warships a valid plan. However, both sides of the conflict had to deal with different socially constructed backgrounds. The South's agricultural heritage and lack of industrial development hindered its ability to build or improve naval technology at home—forcing it to look abroad for assistance at a time when major nations would not recognize the Confederacy's official existence. The Union's entrenched naval traditions and cumbersome bureaucracy slowed approval of new and often unproven technologies. The result of these forces, military and technological, was an unforgiving trial by fire for the ironclad armored warship in the American Civil War. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of History in partial fulfillment of the Doctor of Philosophy. / Fall Semester 2015. / November 3, 2015. / Civil War, Confederacy, Innovation, Ironclad, Navy, Union / Includes bibliographical references. / Michael Creswell, Professor Directing Dissertation; Mark Souva, University Representative; Ron Doel, Committee Member; Kristine Harper, Committee Member; Kurt Piehler, Committee Member.

<p> This dissertation looks at the life and work of famed English Aristocrat Robert Boyle. Specifically, I examine his treatment of generation and its organizing forces&mdash;seminal principles, plastic powers, and petrifick spirits. Generation, I argue, provided the context by which Boyle was introduced both to chymistry and anatomy. The problem of generation would remain at the forefront of his concerns as he experimented in chymistry, pneumatics, minerals, anatomy, transmutation, and plants. Looking at the various communities in Europe with which Robert Boyle interacted, I show that the mechanical philosophy was actually quite diverse. As one of the most influential scholars of his time, Boyle presents a distinctly mechanical account of generation that would have a profound effect upon Western science.</p>

<p> This dissertation tests an original hybrid methodology to explore the rapid spread of the idea of human-made climate change that began in the 1950s after the idea had lain dormant for half a century. It describes the 1950s rhetorical events that triggered the idea&rsquo;s diffusion, then traces how its rhetorical uses gradually gave root to the end-of-thecentury political impasse over how to respond to the societal implications of the idea. </p><p> The research methodology rests on the simple logic that an idea can only spread by being used in human discourses. It combines traditions of rhetorical historiography with a philosophical view of intellectual history as the cumulative effect of a &ldquo;natural selection&rdquo; of ideas and their spread by human individuals over time and geography. It calls for sampling and analyzing rhetorical artifacts in light of the rhetorical situations in which they originate, focusing on how the idea of human-made climate change is used rhetorically in scientific and other discourses. The analyses form the basis of a narrative giving emphasis both to rhetorical continuities and to conversation-changing rhetorical events. They also show how these rhetorical dynamics involve interactions of human communities using or attacking the idea for their communal purposes. </p><p> The results challenge science-focused understandings of the history of the idea itself and also suggest that the methodology may be more broadly useful. </p><p> As to the history, the analyses highlight how changes in the rhetorical uses of the idea made possible its 1950s breakout in climate science, then led to uses that spread it into other sciences and into environmentalism in the 1960s, attached it to apocalyptic environmentalism in the 1970s, injected it into partisan politics in 1980s and shaped the political impasse during the 1990s. </p><p> The data show that the methodology reveals elements of the discourses missed in histories emphasizing the &ldquo;power of ideas,&rdquo; suggesting that a focus on the usefulness of ideas may be more fruitful. A focus on rhetorical uses of ideas grounds the causation of intellectual change in human motivation and agency, expressed in material acts that multiply and disperse naturally through communities and populations.</p>

Focusing on the period from approximately 1800-1865, this thesis uses a historical conceptualist perspective to examine how psychiatric history intersects with the lived experience of slaves in the antebellum south. Unlike previous works that tell the history of psychiatry through the history of the asylum movement, this study seeks to emphasize how everyday Americans, from white physicians to slaves, conceptualized, discussed, diagnosed, and treated black insanity. In the process, this study illuminates the way the politics, beliefs, and culture of nineteenth-century society impacted the way Americans viewed black insanity. Moreover, the findings presented in this thesis attest to the pivotal role race, gender, and class played in both the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness in the antebellum south. Hence, paying careful attention to the politics of the time, this study focuses on the highly contested and flexible process that was conceptualizing, diagnosing, quantifying, and treating black insanity in the antebellum south, and encourages readers to consider how the label “insane” impacted the life of an afflicted slave and their community. / A Thesis submitted to the Department of History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. / Spring Semester 2018. / March 23, 2018. / antebellum, insanity, mental, physicians, slavery, south / Includes bibliographical references. / Katherine C. Mooney, Professor Directing Thesis; Joseph Gabriel, Committee Member; Maxine Jones, Committee Member.

Displays of dinosaurs have become a staple of modern natural history museums, but these did not emerge until the turn of the twentieth century. Through the work of Edward Drinker Cope and Othniel Charles Marsh in this field (despite their intense rivalry), paleontology grew as a discipline and, after losing federal funding, found a new home in museums and universities. Recognizing the potential of large dinosaurs for display and education, major natural history museums such as the American Museum of Natural History in New York under Henry Osborn began competing for their own specimens. Much work has been done on the efforts of these emerging large museums. Smaller museums such as the University of Wyoming Museum, however, have been much less studied. Through its proximity to immense, rich fossil fields, the university became directly connected to the major events shaping paleontology at the time. Yet differences in the pedagogy and intentions behind its formation—a sense of state pride rather than the concerns of wealthy, elite sponsors—served to set it apart from larger, more well-known institutions. / A Thesis submitted to the Program in the History and Philosophy of Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. / Summer Semester 2017. / July 17, 2017. / Includes bibliographical references. / Ronald E. Doel, Professor Directing Thesis; Michael Ruse, Committee Member; Kristina Buhrman, Committee Member; Sandra Varry, Committee Member.

<p> Philosopher of science Wilfrid Sellars argues that there are two mutually exclusive images of human-in-the-world that philosophy ought to unify: the "manifest image" of common, shared experience and the "scientific image" of imperceptible objects. Process philosophy, as a metaphysical framework, is in a unique position to allow both images to sit together in dynamic tension, rather than allowing one image to collapse into the other. Not only do I maintain that process philosophy is logically robust, but I also argue that there are several instances of empirical verification of process as an ontology.</p><p> Taking a process ontology seriously, however, requires that we re-articulate an understanding of the two grand narratives that are utilized to explain our origins: the socio-cultural evolution of consciousness and the objective evolution of the universe. I call these the <i>history of science</i> and the <i>science of history,</i> respectively. In Western academia, the <i>science of history</i> is usually given ontological priority; but within a process metaphysic, neither can be said to be explanatorily primary. That which holds these two narratives together, and that which produces spacetime itself, I refer to as "pretemporal origination." The mode through which this process elicits evolution is through creative-discovery, wherein creation and discovery are not two separate modes of mind-universe interaction, but unified on a continuum of constraints.</p>

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Toronto, 2008. / Includes bibliographical references.