The Structures of Practical Knowledge

493 Pages·2017·31.502 MB·English

by  Matteo Valleriani (eds.)

Matteo Valleriani
Editor
The Structures
of Practical
Knowledge
The Structures of Practical Knowledge
Matteo Valleriani
Editor
The Structures
of Practical Knowledge
Editor
Matteo Valleriani
Max Planck Institute for the History of Science
Berlin, Germany
ISBN 978-3-319-45670-6 ISBN 978-3-319-45671-3 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-45671-3
Library of Congress Control Number: 2016960669
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or
part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way,
and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software,
or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in
this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor
the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material
contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
Printed on acid-free paper
This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature
The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Foreword
Quel ramo del lago di Como…
Alessandro Manzoni’s famous poem—I promessi sposi (The Betrothed)—
begins with these words. This poem, which is the milestone of modern Italian
literature, led many generations of Italians to reflect upon their habits, their
fears, their social identity, and, in one word, their culture. It established this
culture and even shaped the terminology used to discuss it.
This volume obviously presents the results of a much more modest
research endeavor, but it nevertheless has at least one thing in common with
Manzoni’s literary project: it also originated at Lake Como. It was at the
splendid setting of the Villa Vigoni that I first discussed the basic idea for this
project with Eileen Reeves and John Heilbron during a walk in the woods.
The occasion was a workshop organized in 2012 by Andrea Albrecht,
Giovanna Cordibella, and Volker Remmert titled “The Inkwell and the
Telescope: Galileo Galilei at the Crossroads of Scientific, Literary, and Visual
Cultures in the 17th Century.” At the conference, I presented the subject of
my own contribution to this book—my study of the tradition of treatises on
The Sphere—for the first time and I discussed with them the general frame in
which I was collocating my research: the structures of practical knowledge.
My intention was to discuss an epistemology of practical knowledge using
a bottom-up approach: from case studies to reflections of epistemic character.
I therefore needed help in collecting a series of heterogeneous case studies,
all of which should reflect on the role of practical knowledge in shaping
abstract knowledge systems. I needed case studies and I also needed people
who were willing to discuss this epistemic issue with me. Eileen and John
helped me to shape my idea more systematically so that I was better equipped
to approach other colleagues for help.
Before this event, however, and in spite of the fact that the idea had not
fully materialized, it was already anchored in a more general frame. During
several discussions with Jürgen Renn, director of Department 1 of the Max
Planck Institute for the History of Science, we envisioned what Jürgen at that
time called “the Matrix.”
The Matrix is a stable structure of epistemic economy. It considers useful
aspects of knowledge and spillover effects that enable knowledge produced in
a specific context to be used in a different one. The Matrix has both a cogni-
tive and a social and material dimension, and links early modern science and
its organization, to the phenomenon of the Industrial Revolution, considered
v
vi Foreword
as a process made sustainable by the positive feedback between material and
epistemic economy. The link between the early modern period and the
Industrial Revolution is represented by the continuity of knowledge-intensive
projects, which required explicit knowledge management, and thus also rul-
ing institutions and scientific academies. Examples of such knowledge-
intensive enterprises are building projects, military campaigns; journeys of
exploration, mining and shipbuilding enterprises, technological gardening,
manufacturing, glass, paper, and book production, activities in the frame of
metallurgy and brewing, and construction of machines and water supply
systems.
In other words, we were looking for those constant elements of knowledge
economy that were developed during the early modern period and that can be
considered as elements fundamental to the explanation of the emergence of
the historical phenomenon we call the Industrial Revolution. We both had the
centralized management of prominent early modern building sites in mind,
such as the cathedral of Florence, where the Opera della Lana succeeded in
organizing not only the labor but also the knowledge needed to realize that
venture. The knowledge was produced, preserved, transformed, and
readapted; it was used to conceive and distribute tasks while determining who
were the right people, or groups of people, to perform specific tasks.
Institutions such as the Opera della Lana were administrations able to handle
knowledge in a way that could induce innovations, as in the case of the
famous cupola of Filippo Brunelleschi. Jürgen and I had been working on the
challenging introduction to a three-volume work on the history of architec-
ture—Wissensgeschichte der Architektur (Edition Open Access, Berlin,
2014)—and while investigating the role that institutions played in this his-
tory, we recognized that innovations, such as those introduced by Brunelleschi,
were only possible on the basis of a specific administration of vast knowledge
resources. Returning to the Matrix, we asked if this could be a model to
explain the installation of the first industrial plants. Had the industrialization
process benefitted from meanwhile established systems of knowledge man-
agement, which went back to the early modern period?
Fascinated by this idea, I set out to better understand how knowledge was
produced in a form that enabled such institutions to manage it. After all, the
Opera della Lana could have limited its work to the selection of the right
people, without, for instance, initiating a public context according to whose
rules architects had to codify their ideas in the form of models to be used for
public discussion. From my previous research on Galileo’s work and its rela-
tion to the knowledge of the professionals working at the Venetian Arsenal, I
already knew that during the second half of the sixteenth century, the produc-
tion coordinators in the Arsenal had developed a way of codifying the funda-
mental elements to describe the construction process of all the models of
ships of the North Adriatic Sea by means of drawings and written texts. The
codification process of practical knowledge that they undertook had resulted
from an intrinsic necessity to manage the production of ships.
Thus, it seemed natural to ask why the early modern period testifies to a
continuously increasing production of externalizations of practical knowl-
edge, whether these are artifacts such as models, drawings, or texts. This was
Foreword vii
certainly not done in order to improve the social status of the authors of such
texts. This aspect certainly existed, and, if the book happened to help them
obtain a better position, it was certainly a welcome effect. But looking at the
entire process, which continued over centuries, this cannot have been the pri-
mary reason. The explanation must lie in the interplay between those institu-
tions, their evolution and rules, and the people who carried and made use of
the practical knowledge—in other words, the management and therefore the
knowledge economy. From this perspective, this volume is intended as a first
contribution to the project we call the Matrix. Whether the Matrix will ever
become a book, I do not know, but it is certainly our muse in looking for
continuities in history—my favorite passatempo—rather than breaks and
disruptions.
From a different perspective, however, an even more general question had
to be faced to achieve this goal. How can an externalization of practical
knowledge be considered a constituent of knowledge whose primary goal is
no longer the production of an object but rather the understanding of natural
phenomena? How did this happen? On an individual level, all possible moti-
vations can be found in history to explain why people, whether professionals,
managers, or philosophers, began compiling texts on practical knowledge.
Micro case studies are vital in helping us to understand not only why these
texts were compiled but also how they were written, which form of codifica-
tion of knowledge they represent, and which means and methods were used
to conceive and design them. But what is the exact role of models, artifacts,
and objects in the process of the formation of abstract knowledge systems?
What relations exist between texts, images, and objects in the process of the
codification of practical knowledge? And, my main question, what exactly
happened to this knowledge once it was first codified?
Once I was finally able to clarify these questions for myself, I thought of
using the overly broad term “structure(s)” to frame all my ideas. If artifacts,
images, and texts are managed, it means they are moved from one context to
another. They are not restructured in themselves but are connected to other
knowledge sources; they enter a different knowledge system and as a conse-
quence may receive different meanings and values. At this level, the term
“structures” is, therefore, also used instead of “knowledge system,” and for
this reason, the reading of this volume can sometimes be somewhat demand-
ing. But the term “structure” has one great advantage in that it also naturally
relates to the structure of practical knowledge itself, for instance, the work-
flow, the precise series of actions, used to produce something, and as well to
the social structure of those who produced and of those who managed knowl-
edge. “Structures,” therefore, ensure that we do not forget that practical
knowledge, its social dimensions, and the conceptual system in which it is
embedded are one and the same phenomenon, a phenomenon that should be
analyzed in all its complexity.
The Structures of Practical Knowledge is an epistemological narrative. It
investigates the nature of practical knowledge: why, how, when, and by whom
it was codified and how its codified aspects were structured into knowledge
systems. In the first chapter, I discuss at length the fundamental aspects of the
epistemology of practical knowledge that emerged from this entire work.
viii Foreword
Relevant results from all the contributions are integrated into this general
view, and this chapter, therefore, functions also by way of introduction. The
contributions touch upon all of the aspects considered relevant for an episte-
mology of practical knowledge to differing degrees. They are therefore
ordered based on a certain predominance of one or the other aspect, so as to
begin with the practical knowledge and those forms of its codification that
directly emerged from the praxis but then moved away toward those
conceptual structures less directly linked to the praxis itself. It continues with
the social structures of professionals and those who codified practical knowl-
edge (including the actors’ perspective) and ends with contributions that deal
more directly with the formation of different conceptual structures.
The contributions could also have been grouped according to the activity
or scientific disciplines in which the case studies were developed, such as
astronomy, mining, or architecture, but this was not within the scope of the
volume. Instead, it reflects the output of a working group that was set up in
2013 to discuss aspects of the epistemology of practical knowledge. In total,
the group met twice: in 2013 and at the end of 2014. Pre-circulating drafts of
papers were discussed during the lectures of the first meeting, and a first com-
plete version of the papers was discussed during the second meeting. A sec-
ond version of the essays was sent to review in July 2015. The final version
was delivered in Spring 2016. While I take full responsibility for the choice
of what is featured in this volume, I would like to emphasize that any interest
generated by it will be thanks to the work shared equally by all participants
and contributors.
Berlin Wilmersdorf, Germany Matteo Valleriani
May 28, 2016
Acknowledgments
First of all, I would like to thank the contributors to this volume for their
willingness to discuss my ideas. What I have learned from this experience
will certainly provide a solid background for further research initiatives.
Special thanks go to Jürgen Renn for his intellectual proximity and orienta-
tion and, a not irrelevant aspect, for his generosity in giving financial support
to the working group and its output. I would then like to thank John Heilbron
for his continuous support during the long process of producing this book and
also for his precious advice, comments, and critique. Not without some
remorse, I would like to thank Jim Bennett who was initially part of the group
but unfortunately had to leave as further participation would have implied a
new research endeavor that was incompatible with his schedule. During the
first meeting, our discussion benefited from the ideas of a series of discus-
sants: Johanna Biank, Anna Jerratsch, Gunthild Storeck, Maria Avxentevskaya,
Alan Chalmers, and Antony Malet. Concerning the preparation of the first
introductory chapter, I would like to thank Matthias Schemmel and
Massimiliano Badino for their extremely valuable critical reading. Throughout
the project, the organization of the meetings, the preparation of the readers,
and the work on the publication were carried out by Anna Siebold, who not
only supported my research but also gave me many new intellectual impulses
during the last three years and without whom it would have certainly been
impossible for me to achieve this and many other results. The organization of
the meetings received the decisive support of Petra Schröter and the office of
Department 1. As a guide through the mysterious paths that lead to the cre-
ation of a material book, I would like to thank the editorial manager of
Department 1, my office mate and friend, Lindy Divarci. For the index of the
volume, I am very grateful to Olga Potschernina. The almost insurmountable
work of retrieving all the rights of reproduction for the many images con-
tained in this volume was accomplished by Urte Brauckmann of the Library
of the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science. The Library covered
the expenses for the acquisition of electronic files of images and permissions
for their use. In this respect, I would like to also thank both the former and
current directors of the institute’s Library, Urs Schoepflin and Esther Chen,
respectively.
ix
Contents
1 The Epistemology of Practical Knowledge ................................ 1
Matteo Valleriani
2 Pocket-Size Architectural Notebooks and the
Codification of Practical Knowledge .......................................... 21
Elizabeth M. Merrill
3 Brewing Ale and Boiling Water in 1651 ..................................... 55
Elaine Leong
4 “Which Cannot Be Sufficiently Described by My Pen.”
The Codification of Knowledge in Theater Engineering,
1480–1680...................................................................................... 77
Viktoria Tkaczyk
5 Shooting with Ink ......................................................................... 115
Jochen Büttner
6 Doing It Wrong: The Translation of Artisanal
Knowledge and the Codification of Error ................................. 167
Sven Dupré
7 The Chiaroscuro Woodcut in the Early Modern Period .......... 189
Eileen Reeves
8 Multi-tasking “Pre-professional” Architect/Engineers
and Other Bricolagic Practitioners as Key Figures in the
Elision of Boundaries Between Practice and Learning
in Sixteenth-Century Europe: Some Roman Examples ........... 223
Pamela O. Long
9 Architectural Knowledge ............................................................ 247
Wolfgang Lefèvre
10 Knowledge by Design—Architecture and Jade Models
During the Qianlong 乾隆 Reign (1735–1796)........................... 271
Dagmar Schäfer
11 Hybrid Experts ............................................................................. 287
Ursula Klein
xi