In an attempt to create a more coherent general picture of the history of science, historians have offered suggestions for categorizing the large-scale historical transformations in understanding nature, including "Ways of Knowing" (Pickstone) or "Styles of Knowing" (Kwa) and the use of mechanical metaphors like clocks and computers (van Lunteren). Other historians have advocated a generalist vision that moves away from microstudies to a "Grand Narrative." In many of these generalist histories of modern science, chemistry is relatively neglected, and this session brings together scholars to suggest ways in which the history of chemistry can enrich these larger narratives. Ramberg offers some speculations on possible reasons for the rarity of chemistry, and sketches out how history of chemistry would enrich the broader narratives in history of science. Gordin argues that fully incorporating chemistry into broader narratives is related to the difficulty in defining the boundaries of chemistry, connecting the historiographic problem to that of defining the political boundaries of Germany. Chang suggests that the “compositionist” way of knowing in chemistry has influenced the later development of the reductionism that underlies much of modern science, and that understanding this role of chemistry is crucial to any “big picture” thinking in the history of science. Roberts and Werrett argue that the broader field of history can benefit from the integrated inclusion of the history of chemistry and its range of practices. All of these presentations argue that understanding the development of modern science requires considering the richness of chemical thought.
