Goethe's theoretical comments on the acknowledgement of the natural sciences dilettante differ considerably from his own experiences in this role (Farbenlehre, Zwischenkieferknochen) of dilettante. Therefore, it seems necessary to raise general questions on the concept: dilettante of natural sciences during Goethe's time, furthermore, on the characterization and labeling of such a dilettante in an historical‐scientific context. This is especially important since up to the present time this particular problem has hardly ever been examined. In addition, there is a summary of (...) an historical case study, the discovery of the human intermaxillary bone by Goethe and of the specialists' reactions on this discovery, especially that of Soemmerring. (shrink)

This contribution is focussed on origin and digestion of voyage-observation during the age of imperialism. Interpretation of Ferdinand von Richthofen's diary notes taken of his voyages through China makes evident, that a gradual chance of contents of his observations had taken place. A merely imperialistic formulation of the questions at the beginning progrades towards an approach to understand land and people.A comparison of this observation contents with later publications of Richthofen about China shows, that they were again changed under the (...) auspices of German imperialistic politics in favour of far-reaching geopolitical speculations. This change takes place within the scientific community, where Richthofen had made a career by then. Amongst others the reason was to consolidate the newly established discipline of geography at German universities. Richthofen's geopolitical speculations thus formulated became the base for the occupation of the bay of Kiautschou by German forces during 1897. (shrink)

The change from ancient and medieval to modern natural science, called Wende , must be associated with the work of Johannes Kepler and not that of Nicolaus Copernicus. Copernicus merely showed the way, introducing heliocentricity as the order of the planets. This Wende resulted from the synthesis of several disciplines formerly isolated from each other, namely mathematical astronomy, new physics, mathematical harmony, astrology, new physical optics, and natural theology. Whereas Copernicus united mathematical astronomy and peripatetic physics, Kepler was first to (...) see the necessity for providing a physical explanation and an ontological foundation to the heliocentric system. He was the first to consider and measure the movement of the planets in depth. The elements for his new physics Kepler obtained not from newly observed data, but from a harmonic archetypus of the regular polyhedra fitted in between excentric planetary spheres. On the basis of this archetypus he accepted the new heliocentric planetary system as a physical reality. That is why astronomy, by way of taking into account stereometric quantities, is, in Kepler's eyes, a kind of divine worship. Later, the best empirical data had also to be taken into consideration as a means of proving this a priori archetypus .The result was, on the one hand, a universal natural science able to explain natural processes in grater abundance than ever before or since in the history of science. Although accepted only in parts, it resulted in founding a new natural science with adherent mathematical and empirical methods. It also led Kepler to establish, step by step, the elliptical path of the planets, thereby overcoming, for the first time, the two axioms of ancient astronomy, requiring uniform and circular planetary motion.It has been shown that this Keplerian Wende was possible only within the Historischen Erfahrungsraum of Renaissance Humanism , which came about itself as the result of reactivating the scientific and philosophical thinking of the ancient Greeks and was accomplished by three steps relating to the revival of original ancient writings, the ancient knowledge of natural facts and data, and the ancient scientific and philosophical ideas and mentalities. (shrink)