Méthot Pierre-Olivier
Faculté de philosophie, Université Laval, 2325 rue des Bibliothèques, Québec, Québec G1R 1V7, Canada; Centre interuniversitaire de recherche sur la science et la technologie, Université du Québec à Montréal, C.P. 8888, succ., Centre-ville, Montréal, Québec H3C 3P8, Canada.
Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci. 2016 Oct;59:145-53. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsc.2016.02.011. Epub 2016 Mar 29.
Concerned with the study of viruses and the diseases they cause, virology is now a well-established scientific discipline. Whereas aspects of its history from the late nineteenth to the mid-twentieth century have often been recounted through a number of detailed case studies, few general discussions of the historiography of virology have been offered. Looking at the ways in which the history of virology has been told, this article examines a number of debates among scientists and historians of biology and show how they are based on a different understanding of notions such as "discipline", of processes such as "scientific discovery" as well as on distinct views about what the history of science is and how it should be written (the opposition between "longue durée" and "micro-history" or between history of "concepts" versus "experimental methods"). The analysis provided here also suggests that a richer historiography of virology will require looking at the variations over time of the relations between conceptual, technological, and institutional factors that fostered its development at the intersection of several other scientific fields in the life sciences.
病毒学专注于病毒及其引发疾病的研究,如今已成为一门成熟的科学学科。尽管从19世纪末到20世纪中叶其历史的诸多方面常常通过一系列详细的案例研究得以叙述,但对病毒学史编纂的一般性讨论却很少。通过审视病毒学史的讲述方式,本文考察了生物学家和科学史家之间的一些争论,并展示了这些争论是如何基于对“学科”等概念、“科学发现”等过程的不同理解,以及对科学史是什么和应如何书写的不同观点(“长时段”与“微观史”之间的对立,或“概念”史与“实验方法”史之间的对立)。此处提供的分析还表明,更丰富的病毒学史编纂需要考察概念、技术和制度因素之间关系随时间的变化,这些因素在生命科学的其他几个科学领域的交叉点上促进了病毒学的发展。