Opothleyahola

	History of science portal This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Abraham

Gary A. Abraham "Misunderstanding the Merton Thesis: A Boundary Dispute between History and Sociology." Isis (journal), 74 (1983): 368-387. Abridged in Puritanism and teh Rise of Modern Science, Edited by I. Bernard Cohen, 233-245, Rutgers University Press, 1990

Abraham argues that historians: (1) have shown a disciplinary bias in their approach to the Merton thesis; (2) have harmfully changed the terms of the thesis; and (3) have failed even to understand Merton's sociological perspective. Abraham criticizes all of the major historical writings--both friendly to Merton and hostile--as simply missing the point. That point is that social values and cultural ideas ("institutions" in the sense used by sociologists) are what is at stake: it is a mistake to focus on theological doctrines, specific individuals, or specific writings as such. Likewise, argues Abraham, focusing on institutions (in the nonsociological sense of organizations) as a test case is also a misunderstanding of Merton's claims. ^[1]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Firefly322 (talk • contribs) 01:28, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Science and Religion in the English Speaking World, 1600-1727 A Biliographic Guide to the Secondary Literature, Richard S. Boorks & David K. Himrod, Scarecrow Press, 2001, ISBN 0-8108-4011-1, p. 2

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Merton thesis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:04, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Synthesis

There seems to be a lot of synthesis using sources that don't directly discuss Morton's thesis. I removed some but there's more work to do... —Paleo Neonate – 00:54, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Science and Religion in the English Speaking World, 1600-1727 A Biliographic Guide to the Secondary Literature, Richard S. Boorks & David K. Himrod, Scarecrow Press, 2001, ISBN 0-8108-4011-1, p. 2

[1]