
Vial and Error: Revisiting the “Whig Interpretation” in the History of Science - benbreen
http://chronicle.com/article/VialError/234826
======
benbreen
Yes, the subtitle of the article as it was published is different, but as the
author of the piece I felt ok with switching it out for the more
straightforward and descriptive one I wanted to use (authors almost never have
final say over headlines). Happy to answer any questions, or debate anyone who
really loved the David Wootton or Steven Weinberg books! I actually enjoyed
reading Weinberg's book quite a bit, especially his commitment to getting the
technical details right, but I found the overarching picture it gives of the
history of science to be unpersuasive for reasons which hopefully are made
clear in the article.

Here's Steven Weinberg's New York Review of Books article for background on
his basic approach to the history of science:
[http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2015/12/17/eye-present-
whig-...](http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2015/12/17/eye-present-whig-history-
science/)

