Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T03:40:38.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Appreciating Key Experiments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2009

Joseph D. Robinson
Joseph D. Robinson
Affiliation:
Department of Pharmacology, State University of New York, Upstate Medical Center, Syracuse, New York 13210, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Gilbert and Mulkay, in their paper ‘Experiments Are the Key’, present responses of scientists to questions about the development of the chemiosmotic hypothesis of energy coupling in oxidative and photophosphorylation, and infer from these responses both the meaninglessness of the concept ‘key experiment’ and the hopelessness of searching for any data as a bedrock for historical analysis. Gilbert and Mulkay's nihilism is, however, rooted in a lack of understanding of the specific scientific issues involved. A closer look at a proposed ‘key experiment’ shows certain obvious characteristics that could be criteria for a ‘key experiment’ moreover, the actual scientific response to that experiment demonstrates its pivotal role in the development of the field. Instead of demonstrating the lack of empirical bases for scientific judgment, Gilbert and Mulkay demonstrate the necessity for identifying the crucial issues and pursuing them, in questioning the scientists as well as in examining other sources.

Type
Research Article
Information
The British Journal for the History of Science , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , March 1986 , pp. 51 - 56
Copyright
Copyright © British Society for the History of Science 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

I am indebted to the critical comments of a referee for this journal, Dr John Law.

1. Gilbert, G. N. & Mulkay, M.: ‘Experiments Are the Key. Participants' Histories and Historians' Histories of Science’, Isis, (1984), 75, p. 105–125, on p. 122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. Ibid., p. 124.

3. Woolgar, S.: ‘Interests and Explanation in the Social Study of Science’. Soc. Stud. Sci. (1981), 11, p. 365–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Barnes, B.: ‘On the “Hows” and “Whys” of Cultural Change’. Soc. Stud. Sci. (1981), 11, p. 481–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. Here the real names are used rather than the pseudonyms employed by Gilbert, and Mulkay, : ‘Spencer’Google Scholar for Mitchell and ‘Miller’ for Jagendorf. The acid-bath experiment is described in Jagendorf, A. T. & Uribe, E.: ‘ATP Formation Caused by Acid-Bath Transition of Spinach Chloroplasts’ Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA (1966), 55, p. 170–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5. Mitchell, P.: ‘Coupling of Phosphorylation to Electron and Hydrogen Transfer by a Chemi-Osmotic Type of Mechanism’. Nature, (1961), 191, 144–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6. For more detailed accounts of the development of these issues see: Ernster, L. & Schatz, G.: ‘Mitochondria: A Historical Review’, J. Cell Biol. (1981), 91, p. 227s–255sCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed, and Robinson, J. D.: ‘The Chemiosmotic Hypothesis of Energy Coupling and the Path of Scientific Opportunity’. Perspect. Biol. Med. (1984), 27, p. 367–383.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

7. Mitchell, P. & Moyle, J.: ‘Stoichiometry of Proton Translocation Through the Respiratory Chain and Adenosine Triphosphatase Systems of Rat Liver Mitochondria’. Nature, (1965), 208, p. 1.47–152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

8. Jagendorf, & Uribe, , op. cit. (4).Google Scholar

9. McCarty, R. E. & Racker, E.: ‘Effects of an Antiserum to the Chloroplast Coupling Factor on Photophosphorylation and Related Processes’. Fed. Proc. (1966), 25, p. 226.Google Scholar

10. Reid, R. A., Moyle, J. & Mitchell, P.: ‘Synthesis of Adenosine Triphosphate by a Protonmotive Force in Rat Liver Mitochondria’. Nature, (1966), 212, p. 257–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

11. Lehninger, A. L. ed.: ‘Energy Coupling in Electron Transport’. Fed. Proc. (1967), 26, p. 1333–1379.Google ScholarPubMed

12. Robinson, , op. cit. (5), p. 371.Google Scholar

13. Ibid., p. 371.

14. cf. Barnes, B.: ‘;Scientific Knowledge and Sociological Theory. London, 1974Google Scholar; Bloor, D.: Knowledge and Social Imagery. London, 1976Google Scholar; Smith, P.: Realism and the Progress of Science. Cambridge 1981CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Newton-Smith, W. H.: The Rationality of Science. London, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15. Gilbert, & Mulkay, , op. cit. (1), p. 117.Google Scholar

16. Ibid., p.117.

17. Chance, B., Lee, C.-P. & Mela, L.: ‘Control and Conservation of Energy in the Cytochrome Chain’. Fed. Proc. (1967), 26, p. 1341–1354, on p. 1342.Google ScholarPubMed

18. Ibid., p. 1344.

19. Thayer, W. S. & Hinkle, P. C: ‘Kinetics of Adenosine Triphosphate Synthesis in Bovine Heart Submitochondrial Particles’.J. Biol. Chem. (1975), 250, p. 5336–5342.Google ScholarPubMed