Research On The Comparison Between Mason And Dampier’s Paradigm Of History Of Science And Its Value

The advence of science and technology has brought human beings huge changes.Therefore, the historic progress of the development of science and technologybecame the point which man focus on. In order to research this development andchanges, man found that the research also needed to use theories and methods ofrelative subjects. The object of the research on the history of science is relativelycomplex. Using comparative method to research is not only beneficial to make thehistory of science clear, but plays an guiding role to get the thinking of the history ofscience further.The paper chooses A History of Science and Science, the two famous historiansof science in the20thcentury Mason and Dampier’s sole and complete works of theirownselves, as research objection. It uses the meta-theory of history, the paradigm ofhistoriography, the mode and methodology of positivist historiography, the conceptof historic advancement, the concept of historic advancement as historical theory,and use the theory of Kuhn’s paradigm, the researching method of lakatos on historyof science, Whig history and its explanation, Sarton’s new humanism, relativetheories on “internalism” and “externalism” as basic theories of the history of scienceto do comparative research. Through those combination, it argues their constructingmethods on the history of science, summarizes thingking and values of the research,surrounding paradigm of history of science. From western countries’ paradigm ofhistoriography, A History of Science is “diplomatic history”, and Science is thecombination of “diplomatic history” and “positivistic history”. From the angle oflakatos’s relative theory and methods on history of science, with theories onparadigm of historiography, it explains Mason and Dampier’s paradigm of history ofscience. Through comparative methods, it deeply explores the two historian’sthinking on history of science, discusses the meaning and value of comparativeresearch. The content of history of science is relatively complex. Its writing isinevitablely influenced by some subjective elements, such as the writer’s reaearchingbackground, thinking etc. Research under different guiding methods could get totallydifferent results. Comparative research using fixed theories and perspective to studyhistory of science aims to get rid of those subjective elements and reach a relativelyobjective researching target. The comparison between Mason and Dampier’sparadigm of history of science not only make meaning to restore history, deepenwriting methods, search for the innate rules of the development of science, but hascontemporary values on building relations between subjects, promoting thinkings onthe philosophy of science and the institution of the philosophy of science.