Boris M. Hessen.

Boris Mikhailovich Hessen (Russian: Бори́с Миха́йлович Ге́ссен), also Gessen (16 August 1893, Elisavetgrad – 20 December 1936, Moscow),[1] was a Soviet physicist, philosopher and historian of science. He is most famous for his paper on Newton's Principia which became foundational in historiography of science.

Biography

Boris Hessen was born to a Jewish family in Elisavetgrad, in the Kherson Governorate of the Russian Empire (now Kropyvnytskyi, Ukraine). He studied physics and natural sciences at the University of Edinburgh (1913—1914) together with his gymnasium school friend Igor Tamm. He then went to study at the St. Petersburg University (1914—1917). He enlisted in the Red Army in the Russian Civil War, joined the Communist Party in 1919 and became a member of the Revolutionary Military Council (1919—1921) and worked at the Party School. He also continued his physics studies at various places eventually graduating from the Institute of Red Professors in Moscow in 1928. In this year he was criticised by Alexander Maximov, who criticised him for being a "machist" and "right deviationist".[2]

After working in the institute for two more years, he became a physics professor and the chair of the physics department at the Moscow State University in 1931. In 1933 he was elected a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

International Congress of the History of Science

In 1931, as part of a Soviet delegation led by N.I. Bukharin, Hessen delivered the paper "The Socio-Economic Roots of Newton's Principia" at the Second International Congress of the History of Science in London. This work became foundational in the history of science and led to modern studies of scientific revolutions and sociology of science.[3]

Hessen asserted that Isaac Newton's most famous work was created to cater to the goals and desires of 17th century industry and economy. Hessen asserted that Newton's work was inspired by his economic status and context, that the Principia was the solution of technical problems of the bourgeoisie.

At that time in the Soviet Union, the work of Albert Einstein was under attack by Communist Party philosophers; being supposedly motivated by bourgeois values, it was "bourgeois science",[4] and should henceforth be banned. (In many ways this attack was similar to the Deutsche Physik movement in Germany which occurred only a few years later.) Hessen's paper was a lobbying tactic: Party philosophers would not challenge the accuracy of Newton's theories, and to show them as being motivated by bourgeois concerns would, in Hessen's eyes, show that scientific validity could exist whatever the motivations were for undertaking it. However, there is little evidence that his paper had any effect in the internal Soviet philosophical battles over Einstein's work.

Despite its lack of effect in his home country, Hessen's thesis had a wide effect in Western history of science. Hessen's work has been dismissed as "vulgar Marxism".[5] However, its focus on the relationship between society and science was, in its time, seen as novel and inspiring. It was a challenge to the notion that the history of science was the history of individual genius in action, the dominant view at least since William Whewell's History of the Inductive Sciences in 1837.

Few contemporary Western readers of Hessen took his paper at face value. His rigid connection between economy and knowledge was not accepted by a majority of historians. However, his assertion that a connection existed between the growth of knowledge and the art of war, and that ballistics played a central part of physics and Newton's world, was viewed with keen interest. In the shadow of the first war to employ chemical weapons, and as the war machines were again gearing up in preparation for another world war, the role between science, technology, and warfare was becoming more interesting to scholars and scientists. Previous views of science as separate from the mundane or vulgar aspects of practical life — the disembodiment of the scientific mind from its context — were becoming less attractive than a view that science and scientists were increasingly embedded in the world in which they worked.

Physics Institute and death

From 1934 to 1936 Hessen was a deputy director of the Physics Institute in Moscow headed by S.I. Vavilov. On 22 August 1936 Hessen was arrested by the NKVD. He was secretly tried for terrorism by a military tribunal together with his gymnasium school teacher Arkadij O. Apirin. They were found guilty on 20 December 1936 and were executed by shooting the same day. On 21 April 1956 both Apirin and Hessen were rehabilitated (posthumously exonerated).

See also

Writings

  • Boris Hessen, The Social and Economic Roots of Newton's Principia in: Freudenthal, G., McLaughlin, P. (eds) The Social and Economic Roots of the Scientific Revolution, pp.41–101. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 278. Springer, Dordrecht. (Russian original: ).
  • New English translation in: Gideon Freudenthal and Peter McLaughlin, The Social and Economic Roots of the Scientific Revolution, Springer, 2009, pp. 41–101.
  • Boris Hessen, "Preface to Articles by A. Einstein and J.J. Thomson," trans. Sean Winkler, Society and Politics 13.1 (2019): 87 - 102. http://socpol.uvvg.ro/docs/2019-1/5.Hessen.pdf.
  • Classical Physics in Context (unpublished text- and sourcebook, in preparation with Edizioni Ca'Foscari Venice).
  • Boris Hessen: Physics and Philosophy in the Soviet Union, 1927–1931, Neglected Debates on Emergence and Reduction, edited and translated by Chris Talbot and Olga Pattison, Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2021. ISBN 978-3-030-70044-7.

References

  • Gideon Freudenthal, "The Hessen-Grossman Thesis: An Attempt at Rehabilitation" in: Perspectives on Science, Summer 2005, Vol. 13, No. 2, Pages 166-193
  • Loren R. Graham, "The Socio-Political Roots of Boris Hessen: Soviet Marxism and the History of Science" in: Social Studies of Science, Vol. 15, No. 4 (Nov., 1985), pp. 705–722
  • Gideon Freudenthal and Peter McLaughlin, "Boris Hessen: In Lieu of a Biography" in: The Social and Economic Roots of the Scientific Revolution, Springer, 2009, 253-256.
  • Pablo Huerga Melcón, La ciencia en la encrucijada. Análisis crítico de la célebre ponencia de Boris Mihailovich Hessen, "Las raíces socioeconómicas de la mecánica de Newton", desde las coordenadas del materialismo filosófico", Biblioteca Filosofía en español, Fundación Gustavo Bueno,Pentalfa ediciones, Oviedo 1999. (Con prólogo de Serguei Kara-Murza)
  • Boris Hessen, Le radici sociali ed economiche della meccanica di Newton (a cura di Gerardo Ienna; Saggio Introduttivo Gerardo Ienna e Giulia Rispoli; Postfazione Pietro Daniel Omodeo) Castelvecchi, 2017.
  • Boris Hessen, "Las raíces socioeconómicas de la mecánica de Newton", (edición, introducción y notas de Pablo Huerga Melcón) en El Catoblepas. Revista crítica del presente, 2010, nº 100. Enlace

Remarks

  1. ↑ The date of death is given incorrectly in most sources, including the Russian Academy of Sciences web site . The exact date was determined recently by the Russian society Memorial.
  2. ↑ Graham, Loren R. (1985). "The Socio-Political Roots of Boris Hessen: Soviet Marxism and the History of Science". Social Studies of Science. 15 (4): 705–722. doi:10.1177/030631285015004005. ISSN 0306-3127. JSTOR 285401. S2CID 143937146.
  3. ↑ Ienna, Gerardo; Rispoli, Giulia (April 2019). "Boris Hessen at the Crossroads of Science and Ideology". Society and Politics. 13 (1(25)): 37–63. Retrieved 20 May 2019.
  4. ↑ (Graham 1985:711)
  5. ↑ (Schaffer 1984:26)

Works cited

  • Schaffer, Simon (1984), "Newton at the crossroads", Radical Philosophy, 37: 23–38.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.