Baroncini G
Università of Bologna.
Nuncius. 1996;11(2):527-43.
Through the history of the book and the image at the time of the invention of the printing press, this study seeks to clarify the ambiguous situation of the scientific illustration, the reasons for the difficulty in recognizing it as an internal element of scientific discourse as language that is autonomous, competitive and in certain cases stronger than verbal language. This study also investigates an iconoclastic current within scientific inquiry. This tradition permits the identification of a common historical misunderstanding: the false equating of observation and experimentation, on the one hand, and the collocation of research to graphic representation on the other. Finally, the article proposes the application of the interpretation proposed by Panofsky in the past thirty years to the study of the scientific illustration.
通过书籍的历史以及印刷术发明之时的图像，本研究旨在阐明科学插图的模糊状况，即难以将其视为科学话语内部元素的原因，科学插图作为一种自主、具有竞争力且在某些情况下比文字语言更强大的语言。本研究还考察了科学探究中的一种破除偶像的潮流。这一传统使得能够识别一个常见的历史误解：一方面是观察与实验的错误等同，另一方面是研究与图形表示的搭配。最后，本文提议将潘诺夫斯基在过去三十年中提出的阐释应用于科学插图研究。
