Scholarship has grown increasingly nuanced in its grappling with the intersections of religion, science, and technology but requires a new paradigm. Contemporary approaches to specific technologies reveal a wide variety of perspectives but remain too often committed to typological classification. To be vigilant of our obligation to understand and reveal, scholars in the study of religion, science, and technology can adopt a hydra‐logical stance: we can recognize that there are cultural monsters possessing scientific, technological, and religious heads. These heads may (...) work with a common agenda or they might not. They might disagree, pulling their shared body back and forth in a public commotion that lays waste to their surroundings. They might see past one another or move in tandem—purposively or not. Evaluations of climate response and AI benefit from seeing how the various heads are inseparable: indeed, cutting one off simply promotes the growth of new heads. Methodological and analytical clarity, therefore, emerges in the transition from schemes of classification to the recognition of hydras. (shrink)

This essay examines the early career of the chemist Emil Erlenmeyer (1825–1909), focusing on his various endeavors in industrial consulting and entrepreneurship, and his eventual decisive turn, in 1862, to academic research and teaching. This case study offers insights into the developing relationship between theory-based academic research and artisanal and industrial practice in the German states during the 1850s and 1860s. Attention is paid to the relevance of this material to the contemporary historiography of “technoscience.”.