Lisovich I. I. Problems of Openness of Scientific Knowledge in Early Modern English Culture
The article was written within the framework of the project “Virtual Shakespearean Sphere: Transformations of Shakespearian Myth in Modern Culture” supported with a grant from the Russian Foundation for the Humanities (No. 14-03-00552а).
Abstract ♦ The early Modern period saw the rise of new scientific methods of inquiry and of the modern type of scientific institutions, accompanied by the shaping of the major strategies of the openness of scientific knowledge. This modus of openness is what makes the science in the Modern period drastically different from that of the previous epochs and civilizations, when only the chosen few had access to knowledge. Researchers still take a passionate interest in the question what encouraged scholars/scientists, their patrons and whole communities to open up the treasury of knowledge to everyone willing to enter. This issue has become the main subject of our analysis.
The process of constructing an open and public scientific space also featured the rise of various practices, phenomena and factors, such as discursive practices, open research communities and institutions, the “Republic of Letters”, political, social and economic factors and implications of openness of scientific research. In the 16th century, England joined the European scientific communication. Open scientific communication spaces in England were unique as they destroyed the boundaries between social strata and made the communities self-governing. Due to this openness, not only scientific practices influenced the English culture, but the cultural forms also fitted into discourses of science. Strategies of openness, developed during the Scientific Revolution, formed the foundation of modern knowledge and still preserve their topicality, since universal access to knowledge is still impeded by state, corporate and private interest due to various economic, social and political reasons. Closedness is an obstacle to the development of both science and global civilization in general.
Keywords: early modern period, England, open scientific knowledge, closed access scientific knowledge, communicative space.
Lisovich Inna Ivanovna, Candidate of Philology, Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, Culturology and Politology, Moscow University for the Humanities. Postal address: 5 Yunosti St., Moscow, Russian Federation, 111395. Tel.: +7 (499) 374-55-11. E-mail:
mag-inna@yandex.ru
Citation: Lisovich, I. I. (2014) Problemy otkrytosti nauchnogo znaniia v kul'ture Anglii rannego Novogo vremeni [Problems of Openness of Scientific Knowledge in Early Modern English Culture]. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie, no. 4, pp. 156–167. (In Russ.).
Demina, N. V. (2005) Kontseptsiia etosa nauki: Merton i drugie v poiskakh sotsialnoi geometrii norm [The Concept of the Ethos of Science: Merton and Others in Search of Social Geometry of Norms]. Sotsiologicheskii zhurnal, no. 4, pp. 5–47. (In Russ.).
Rorty, R. (1997) Filosofiia i zerkalo prirody [Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature] / tr. from English ; ed. by V. V. Tselishchev. Novosibirsk, Novosibirsk State University Publ. 297 p. (In Russ.).
Trofimova, V. S. (2012) «Zhenskaia respublika uchenosti» v XVII veke. Lichnosti i rasprostranenie idei [“Women's Republic of Letters” in the 17th Century. People and the Dissemination of Ideas]. Saarbrücken, Lambert Academic Publishing. 140 p. (In Russ.).
Habermas, J. (2007) Tekhnika i nauka kak ideologiia [Technology and Science as Ideology]. Moscow, Praksis Publ. 201 [1] p. (In Russ.).
Barbour, R. (1995) Between Atoms and the Spirit: Lucy Hutchinson’s Translation of Lucretius. In: Renaissance Papers, 1994 / ed. by B. J. Baines and G. W. Williams ; Southern Renaissance Conference. Pp. 1–16.
Bertuol, R. (2001) The Square Circle of Margaret Cavendish: The 17th-Century Conceptions of Mind by Means of Mathematics. Language and Literature, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 21–39.
Biagioli, M. (1995) Tacit Knowledge, Courtliness, and the Scientist's Body // Choreographing History / ed. by S. L. Foster. Bloomington, Indiana University Press. vi, 257 р. Pp. 69–81.
Biagioli, M. (2006) From Print to Patents: Living on Instruments in Early Modern Europe, 1500–1800. History of Science, vol. 44 (2), no. 144, pp. 139–186.
Biagioli, M. (2010) How Did Galileo Develop His Telescope? A ‘New’ Letter by Paolo Sarpi. In: The Origins of the Telescope / ed. by A. Van Helden et al. Amsterdam, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences Press. vi, 368 p. Pp. 203–230.
Chartres, R. and Vermont, D. (1998) A Brief History of Gresham College 1597–1997. London, Gresham College. 100 р.
Coleman, N. (2012) Mapping the Republic of Letters. OpenGLAM. March 21. [online] Available at: [archived in ] (accessed 28.08.2014).
Collection, Laboratory, Theater: Scenes of Knowledge in the 17th Century (2005) / ed. by H. Schramm, L. Schwarte and J. Lazardzig. Berlin ; New York, Walterde Gruyter. xxix, 594 p. (Series: Theatrum Scientiarium. Vol. 1).
Cook, H. J. (2002) Body and Passions: Materialism and the Early Modern State. In: Science and Civil Society / ed. by T. H. Broman and L. K. Nyhart. Chicago : University of Chicago Press. x, 373 p. Pp. 25–48. (Osiris. 2nd Series. Vol. 17).
Dasgupta, P., David, P. A. (1985) Information Disclosure and the Economics of Science and Technology : Discussion Paper Series by Centre for Economic Policy Research, no. 73. London, Centre for Economic Policy Research. ii, 37 р.
David, P. A. (2001) From Keeping ‘Nature’s Secrets’ to the Institutionalization of ‘Open Science’. Oxford, University of Oxford. 24 р. (University of Oxford Discussion Papers in Economic and Social History. No. 23, July).
Dear, P. (2007) A Philosophical Duchess: Understanding Margaret Cavendish and the Royal Society. In: Science, Literature, and Rhetoric in Early Modern England / ed. by J. Cummins, D. Burchell. Aldershot ; Burlington, VT : Ashgate. 256 р. Рp. 125–144.
Eamon, W. (1985) From the Secrets of Nature to Public Knowledge: The Origins of the Concept of Openness in Science. Minerva: Review of Science, Learning, and Policy, vol. 23, issue 3, pp. 321–347.
Golinski, J. (2002) The Care of the Self and the Masculine Birth of Science. History of Science, vol. 40 (2), no. 128, pp. 125–145.
Harris, F. (1997) Living in the Neighbourhood of Science: Mary Eveyln, Margaret Cavendish and the Greshamites. In: Women, Science and Medicine 1500–1700 / ed. by L. Hunter and S. Hutton. Stroud, Sutton Publishing. xx, 292 p. Pp. 122–237.
Hutton, S. and Conway, А. (1997) Margaret Cavendish and Seventeenth Century Scientific Thought. In: Women, Science and Medicine 1500–1700 / ed. by L. Hunter and S. Hutton. Stroud, Sutton Publishing. xx, 292 р. Pp. 218–234.
Iliffe, R. (1992) ‘In the Warehouse’: Privacy, Property and Priority in the Early Royal Society. History of Science, vol. 30 (1), no. 87, pp. 29–68.
Iliffe, R. (1995) Material Doubts: Hooke, Artisan Culture and the Exchange of Information in 1670s London. British Journal for the History of Science, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 285–318.
Iliffe, R. (2008) Technicians. Notes and Records: The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science, vol. 62, no. 1 (March), pp. 3–16.
Kearney, H. F. (1970) Scholars and Gentlemen: Universities and Society in Pre-industrial Britain. London, Faber & Faber. 214 p.
Kearney, H. F. (1971) Science and Change, 1500–1700. London, Weidenfeld & Nicolson. 255 p.
Lux, D. and Cook, H. (1998) Closed Circles or Open Networks: Communicating at a Distance during the Scientific Revolution. History of Science, vol. 36 (2), no. 112, pp. 179–211.
Lynn, M. (2006) Popular Science and Public Opinion in Eighteenth-Century France. Manchester ; New York, Manchester University Press. ix, 177 p.
Mason, J. (1992) The Admission of the First Women to the Royal Society of London. Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 279–300.
Mayhew, R. (2004) British Geography's Republic of Letters: Mapping an Imagined Community, 1600–1800. Journal of the History of Ideas, vol. 65, no. 2 (April), pp. 251–276.
Metropolis and Province: Science in British Culture, 1780–1850 (1983) / ed. by I. Inkster and J. Morell. Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press. 288 p.
Rudwick, M. J. S. (1982) Charles Darwin in London: The Integration of Public and Private Science. Isis, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 186–206.
Science and Civil Society (2002) / ed. by T. H. Broman and L. K. Nyhart. Chicago : University of Chicago Press. x, 373 p. (Osiris. 2nd Series. Vol. 17).
Science and the City (2003) / ed. by S. Dierig, J. Lachmund and A. Mendelsohn. Chicago : University of Chicago Press. 282 p. (Osiris. 2nd Series. Vol. 18).
Starr, G. G. (2006) Cavendish, Aesthetics, and the Anti-Platonic Line. Eighteenth-Century Studies, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 295–308.
Stewart, L. (2007) Feedback Loop: A Review Essay on the Public Sphere, Pop Culture, and the Early-Modern Sciences. Canadian Journal of History, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 463–483.
Women, Science and Medicine 1500–1700 (1997) / ed. by L. Hunter and S. Hutton. Stroud, Sutton Publishing. xx, 292 p.
