Stein once urged us not to confuse the means of representation with that which is being represented. Yet that is precisely what philosophers of science appear to have done at the meta-level when it comes to representing the practice of science. Proponents of the so-called ‘syntactic’ view identify theories as logically closed sets of sentences or propositions and models as idealised interpretations, or ‘theoruncula, as Braithwaite called them. Adherents of the ‘semantic’ approach, on the other hand, are typically characterised as (...) taking them to be families of models that are set-theoretic, according to Suppes and others, or abstract, as Giere has argued. da Costa and French (Science and Partial Truth. OUP, Oxford, 2003) suggested that we should refrain from ontological speculation as to the nature of scientific theories and models and focus on their appropriate representation for various purposes within the philosophy of science. Such an approach allows both linguistic and non-linguistic resources to play their appropriate role (see also French and Saatsi, Philosophy of Science, Proceedings of the 2004 PSA Meeting, 78:548–559, 2006) and can be supported by recent case studies illustrating the heterogeneity of scientific practice. My aim in this paper is to further develop this ‘quietist’ view, and to indicate how it offers a fruitful way forward for the philosophy of science. (shrink)

Today's personable, sanitized images of human embryos and fetuses require an audience that is literally and metaphorically distanced from dead specimens. Yet scientists must handle dead specimens to produce embryological knowledge, which only then can be transformed into beautiful photographs and talking fetuses. I begin with an account of Gertrude Stein's experience making a model of a fetal brain. Her tactile encounter is contrasted to the avant-garde artistic tradition that later came to dominate embryo imagery. This essay shows the embryo (...) visualizations portrayed in a contemporary coffee-table book about gestational development to be a remarkable political achievement predicated, in part, on keeping hidden the unsavory details of anatomical technique that transform dead specimens into icons of life. (shrink)

Anatomical exhibitions, online atlases and televised dissections have recently attracted much attention and raised questions concerning the status of and the authority over the human body, the purpose of anatomical education within and outside medical schools and the methods of teaching in the digital age. I propose that for understanding the current public views of anatomy, we need to gain insight into their historical development. This article focuses on anatomies accessible to non-medical audiences in the capital of the Habsburg Empire, (...) Vienna, at the time when the city was the seat of a world-leading medical school. Anatomy at the University of Vienna was famous for its research, instruction and the abundant provision with dissectible corpses. Public anatomies were equally rich and ranged from exhibitions at the Präuscher’s Panoptikon und Anatomisches Museum , established in 1871 in the Prater amusement park, lectures on human and comparative anatomy by the university professor Carl Bernhard Brühl (1863–1890), to displays of anatomical objects at the World Exhibition in 1873. I finish by discussing a collection of letters written by the prospective ‘cadaver donors’, offering an insight into the ways in which medical encounters and anatomical knowledge informed the working-class views of their bodies. By looking at the kinds of anatomy in circulation, as well as at the participants in these exchanges, I want to illuminate the relationship between academic and public anatomies, as well as to reveal the purposes to which public anatomy served. (shrink)

This essay investigates time-lapse cinematography as a hybrid, intermedial practice. To interrogate practices of authorship, publication, copying, storage, and especially distribution, it recovers the history of The Embryonic Development of Drosophila melanogaster, a film made by Eric Lucey at the University of Edinburgh in 1956. An unusually rich archive makes it possible to recover uses and reuses of time-lapse footage in research, teaching, and other forms of communication.

The Human Embryology Collection at the Centre of Anatomy Göttingen, created between 1942 and 1970, represents a unique interrelation of histological sectional series of human embryos and large-format physical models open to the public based on them. The collection was established long after the heyday of human embryology. It is also remarkable in another aspect: while usually models within the discipline are considered research objects, Göttingen embryologist Erich Blechschmidt (1904–1992) based his understanding on a pedagogical impetus. The article highlights the (...) distinctive and unconventional features of Blechschmidt’s undertaking against its disciplinary background. My focus lies on the two practices that are central to human embryology—collecting and modelling—, as well as the derived collection stocks. The special tension between individuality and universality that already characterized the process of their creation is also reflected in the later use of the collection. This tension allowed Blechschmidt to utilize the models in embryological research and anatomical teaching as well as in the broad social debate on abortion and the ethical status of human embryos. (shrink)

ZusammenfassungDie Humanembryologische Dokumentationssammlung Blechschmidt, entstanden an der Universität Göttingen im Zeitraum von 1942 bis etwa 1970, stellt eine einmalige Kombination histologischer Schnittserien menschlicher Embryonen und darauf aufbauender, großformatiger und öffentlich zugänglicher Modelle dar. Nicht nur erfolgte diese Sammlungsgründung für die Disziplin der Humanembryologie erstaunlich spät, sondern ist auch in einer zweiten Hinsicht bemerkenswert: Während an anderen Standorten Modelle primär als Forschungsobjekte verstanden wurden und mit einem Lehreinsatz eine Umnutzung stattfand, war für den Göttinger Embryologen Erich Blechschmidt (1904–1992) von Beginn an (...) ein pädagogischer Impetus maßgeblich. Im Beitrag werden die eigenwilligen Merkmale der Blechschmidt’schen Unternehmung vor ihrem disziplinären Hintergrund herausgearbeitet. Der Schwerpunkt liegt dabei auf den beiden für die Humanembryologie zentralen Praktiken des Sammelns und Modellierens und den dadurch in Göttingen geschaffenen Objektbeständen. Diese waren schon im Entstehungsprozess von einem besonderen Spannungsverhältnis von Individualität und Universalität geprägt, das sich auch in der späteren Nutzung der Sammlung spiegelt. Diese führt durch eine spezifische Individualisierung zuvor anonym gemachter Präparate weit aus der ursprünglichen fachwissenschaftlich-anatomischen Bestimmung in die breite gesellschaftliche Debatte um den ethischen Status menschlicher Embryonen und den Schwangerschaftsabbruch. (shrink)