Hans Strøms værstudier i annen halvdel av 1700-tallet – å observere, å lese verden og å skape orden
- Side: 175-203
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1504-2944-2015-02-02
- Publisert på Idunn: 2015-06-18
- Publisert: 2015-06-18
Presten Hans Strøm (1726–1797) drev systematiske meteorologiske observasjoner fra sin prestegård på Sunnmøre og senere i Eiker. Basert på disse observasjonene publiserte den vidtfavnende naturgranskeren meteorologiske avhandlinger i Skriftserien til Vitenskapsselskapet i Trondheim. Hvorfor studerte Hans Strøm været? Hva forteller hans værstudier om synet på hva kunnskap var for noe, og hva formålet med å produsere den var? Denne artikkelen tar utgangspunkt i Strøms brede forfatterskap for å undersøke det vitenskapshistorikeren John V. Pickstone kaller måter å vite på, og det Lorraine Daston og Peter Galison kaller epistemiske dyder. Artikkelen tematiserer også kunnskapens åsted og spør hvilke rammer Sunnmøre og Eiker utgjorde for Strøms studier av været, og for hans vitenskap.
The weather studies of Hans Strøm in the second half of the 18th century – observing, reading the world and creating order
The Norwegian priest Hans Strøm started systematic meteorological observations at his farm in Sunnmøre on the west coast of Norway in April 1761. The results were published in the journal of the first Scientific Society in Norway, Det Trondhiemske Videnskabsselskabs Skrifter. Why did Strøm observe the weather? To answer this question, this article examines what Strøm regarded as knowledge, and his motivations for knowing. In the course of his career, he published more than 5000 pages of research on nature and of topographical and edifying literature. This wider authorship is taken into account in the article. My investigation was inspired by the works of historians of science such as John V. Pickstone, Lorraine Daston and Peter Galison. Pickstone’s ways of knowing and Daston and Galison’s epistemological virtue known as truth-to-nature form the frameworks for this analysis of Strøm’s science. The former offers a way of examining Strøm’s science without studying disciplines, and the latter a way of understanding essences of science before objectivity. Among Pickstone’s ways of knowing, world reading and natural history give meaning when applied to Strøm’s science. However, in the process, the distinction between them is blurred. Strøm lived in rural Norway, but this did not prevent his membership of many international societies of scientists and researchers. Here, I discuss the role Sunnmøre and Eiker had as venues of Strøm’s science, and conclude that his living in rural Norway was a premise, not an obstacle, to his scientific practice.