写作方法2016resobscura.blogspot.com
如何书写科学史？
How to Write the History of Science?
导读
这篇博文讨论科学史该如何写：既要承认某些概念和方法确有现实依据，又要避免把历史写成“赢家”战胜“输家”的简单叙事。评论区补充了非目的论的变迁观、科普化的写法，以及李约瑟《中国科学技术史》的编纂案例，对任何要处理“进步”“发展”这类宏大主题的写作者都很有参考价值。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
写历史时警惕“赢家/输家”二分，别急着给历史人物发桂冠或戴傻瓜帽，过早褒贬会把复杂的人塞进站不住脚的二元框架。
- 02
用非目的论的眼光写“进步”：变化本身不可预测，不要把今天的结论倒推成历史的必然终点。
- 03
让具体的人出场——古怪的科学家、普通的参与者——幽默和轶事能让覆盖面很广的知识变得可读。
- 04
先想清楚编排体例（按学科、按问题还是按时间），结构本身就是你传递的历史观。
HN 评论精选
警惕“赢家/输家”式二元对立，过早褒贬会扭曲历史。
作者认为科学史的任务之一，是以开放开阔的方式描绘进步的轨迹，尽可能不写成歌颂“赢家”、抹去“输家”的历史，同时承认有些概念确有现实依据、有些则没有；因为过早颁发桂冠和傻瓜帽会带来没有根据、过于草率的二元对立——并非所有 1800 年前的医生都是占星师或江湖郎中。评论者赞同这点，并追问这种草率的二元论是在变多还是变少：赢家/输家二分隐含竞争，所以也可问“竞争是在增加、减少还是持平”？从科学发现的功劳之争到点赞和 karma，他觉得社会正偏向分裂性竞争而非有益协作。
jcr查看英文原文
>"For my own part, I do think that one of the tasks of the history of science and medicine is to chart the trajectory of progress (however we choose to define it) in an open-minded and expansive way that tries as far as possible to avoid writing a history that celebrates the 'winners' and elides the 'losers,' even as it acknowledges that some concepts and methods have a basis in reality and others don't. In part because being too quick to distribute laurels and dunce caps can lead us into unjustified and overly hasty binaries. Not all pre-1800 physicians were astrologers or quacks; not all who quote Shapin or Butterfield are ardent proponents of the Strong Programme." Ben, it's an excellent article. Thanks. I'm curious if you believe the unjustified and overly hasty dualism is becoming more or less prevalent? Since the winners versus losers dichotomy implies competition, another way to rephrase the same question could be, "Is competition increasing, decreasing, or staying about the same?" Whether it's fame and credit for a scientific discovery, or likes and karma points, or any of the many other mostly fabricated and unnecessary competitions, to me it seems society is trending more towards divisive competition rather than beneficial collaboration. Then again, I don't know nearly as much history as you do. ;)
用非目的论视角写科学史：变化不可预测，别写成必然进步的直线。
谈到“进步的轨迹”，推荐先看 James Burke 的《Connections》和《The Day The Universe Changed》，学习他非目的论的变迁观。Burke 的前提是变化不可预测：我们最多能做有根据的猜测，并准备好在多数时候猜错。由此得出的、对科学教学及其历史都很重要的结论是：要让普通人参与到这场加速的变化中——因为如果你不懂怎么建造技术，技术就是陷阱；每次进电梯时你会想到停电时自己正走进的陷阱吗？科学史是一连串越来越复杂的陷阱，只要小心不被困住，它们确实带来巨大好处。另一部系列则讲科学如何改变我们对世界的理解：每有新发现，我们的宇宙就变了。
pdkl95查看英文原文
> trajectory of progress How to write the history of science? First, watch James Burke's histories - Connections[1] and The Day The Universe Changed - for his non-teleological view of change. Connections is an important examination about the trajectory of progress. Burke's premise - which I agree with strongly - is that change is not predictable. We can, at best, make educated guesses about the future and be prepared for those guesses to be completely wrong more often than we like. The conclusions here - which is very relevant to teaching both science and its history - is the importance of involving normal people in this rapidly accelerating rate of change. Why involve people? Because technology is a trap if you don't know how to build it. Do you think of the trap you are walking into (if the power fails) every time you enter an elevator? The history of science is a series of ever more complex traps... that happen to give us incredible benefit as long as we are careful not to get caught. The Day The Universe Change is a different focus, about how science changes our understanding of the world around us. That is, our universe changes with each discovery. [1] The original 1978 series.
幽默、易读加上人物轶事，能让科学史写得广受欢迎。
很少有书像 Bill Bryson 的《万物简史》那样受欢迎。它有趣、易读，覆盖面很广，还以真诚的方式把科学界那些古怪人物推到台前。
yyyuuu查看英文原文
There aren't many books which are as popular as A Short History of nearly everything by Bill Bryson. It is funny and easy read, yet covers a lot of ground. Also brings to the fore the eccentric characters of Science community in a sincere manner
体例与编排本身就是历史观，李约瑟式的宏大编纂值得学习。
不能不提李约瑟（Joseph Needham），这位英国生物化学家对中国事物产生了兴趣。1950 年代初他提议写一部可能只有一卷、涵盖中国科学、数学、工程及其它技艺史的书；到 2016 年已完成 24 卷，另有三卷在写（他本人 1995 年去世）。Simon Winchester 的《The Man Who Loved China》讲的就是这段故事，另有单卷本《The Genius of China》(1986) 和五卷缩写本等。这部作品的编排与处理方式，对“如何写科学史”很有启发。
dredmorbius查看英文原文
I can't not mention Joseph Needham, British biochemist, who developed an interest in things Chinese. In the early 1950s, Needham wrote a proposal for what he suggested might be a one-volume work covering the history of Chinese scientific, mathematical, engineering, and other arts. As of 2016, there are 24 volumes of the work completed, with another three still in process (Needham himself died in 1995). The story is the subject of journalist and author Simon Winchester's book, The Man Who Loved China. There are also several condensations and abridged summaries of Needham's work, including the single-volume The Genius of China (1986) and a five volume work, The Shorter Science and Civilisation. The organisation and treatment of the work (detailed in the first and second volumes of Needham's original, and in the summaries and Winchester's account) are instructive as to how to write a history of science. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Needham https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_Civilisation_in_China
同类还值得读
被低估的工程技能：把文章写好
Undervalued Engineering Skills: Writing Well
这篇文章讨论为什么“写得好”是被低估的工程能力，以及它如何在团队协作、系统设计和职业发展中持续带来回报。
写作方法2019 · 1,109 分 · 371 评4 条写作要点编辑精选每行只写一句话：让写作和修改都更轻松的排版法
Writing one sentence per line
这是 Derek Sivers 的一篇短文，主张写作时每行只放一个句子，而不是按段落排版。
写作方法2022 · 849 分 · 297 评4 条写作要点编辑精选书面沟通是远程工作的超级能力
Written communication is remote work super power
这篇文章讨论远程工作中书面沟通的价值，评论区则补充了异步与同步沟通的适用场景，并提醒读者：备忘录、结论先行、结构化命令格式等书面沟通传统早已有之。
写作方法2020 · 831 分 · 190 评4 条写作要点编辑精选如何写出有用的文字
How to Write Usefully
保罗·格雷厄姆在这篇文章里给"有用的写作"下了一个可操作的公式：有用≈重要×新颖×正确×清楚，任一项为零，整篇文章就等于零；他还主张敢下确定判断、删掉让自己心虚的句子。
写作方法2020 · 821 分 · 285 评4 条写作要点编辑精选如何写得更清楚、想得更清楚，并学会复杂材料（PDF）
How to write more clearly, think more clearly, and learn complex material [pdf]
这份 PDF 讨论如何把文章写清楚、把思路理清楚，并用写作来学习复杂材料。
写作方法2022 · 779 分 · 153 评4 条写作要点编辑精选