| |
| |
Preface | |
| |
| |
| |
Inspiring Interdisciplinarity | |
| |
| |
Texts That Seek to Catalyze Community: An Unexamined Genre of Science | |
| |
| |
The Close Textual-Intertextual Analysis: Combining Rhetorical Criticism and Historical Research | |
| |
| |
| |
Theodosius Dobzhansky's Genetics and the Origin of Species | |
| |
| |
| |
The Initiator of the Evolutionary Synthesis: Historians and Scientist Weigh In | |
| |
| |
Conflict between Disciplines and Theories | |
| |
| |
The Evolutionary Synthesis | |
| |
| |
What Launched the Synthesis? | |
| |
| |
The Influence of Dobzhansky's Genetics and the Origin of Species | |
| |
| |
Prelude to a Rhetorical Reading | |
| |
| |
| |
A Text Rhetorically Designed to Unite Competing Fields | |
| |
| |
Simplifying Theory | |
| |
| |
Surveying the Results of Research | |
| |
| |
Using Language That Promotes Conceptual Change | |
| |
| |
Addressing Social Concerns | |
| |
| |
Conclusions | |
| |
| |
| |
Erwin Schrodinger's What Is Life? The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell | |
| |
| |
| |
The "Uncle Tom's Cabin" of the Molecular Biology Revolution: Assessing the Place of a Text in History | |
| |
| |
The Influence of Schrodinger's Text | |
| |
| |
The Value of Untrue, Unoriginal Science | |
| |
| |
Other Laws of Physics | |
| |
| |
Prelude to a Rhetorical Reading | |
| |
| |
| |
A Text Rhetorically Designed to Negotiate Different Interests and Beliefs | |
| |
| |
Comparison with Other Attempts at Inspiring Interdisciplinary Work | |
| |
| |
Negotiating Common Ground: The Value of Precision | |
| |
| |
Negotiating Professional Goals: The Appeal to Ambition | |
| |
| |
Negotiating Disciplinary Linguistic Practices: Conceptual Chiasmus | |
| |
| |
Negotiating Ideological Commitments: Strategic Ambiguity | |
| |
| |
Conclusions | |
| |
| |
| |
Edward O. Wilson's Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge | |
| |
| |
| |
The Controversy over Sociobiology: Scholars Offer Conflicting Explanations | |
| |
| |
Wilson's Purpose | |
| |
| |
The Effect of Wilson's Interdisciplinary Appeals | |
| |
| |
Explanation 1: Wilson Is Wrong; The Cultural Divide Should Not Be Bridged | |
| |
| |
Explanation 2: Critics Are Unable to See the Truth Because of Political Bias | |
| |
| |
Prelude to a Rhetorical Reading | |
| |
| |
| |
A Text Rhetorically Designed to Fuel Interdisciplinary Hostilities | |
| |
| |
A Rhetoric of Conquest, Not Negotiation | |
| |
| |
An Explicit Commitment to Reductionism | |
| |
| |
Equivocation Rather Than Productive Polysemy | |
| |
| |
What Wilson's Consilience Could Have Been | |
| |
| |
| |
Speaking to Multiple Audiences | |
| |
| |
| |
The Genre | |
| |
| |
Comparison of Dobzhansky and Schrodinger | |
| |
| |
Wilson's Participation in the Genre | |
| |
| |
| |
Contributions to Four Ongoing Conversations | |
| |
| |
Rhetoric of Science | |
| |
| |
Rhetorical Inquiry | |
| |
| |
History of Science | |
| |
| |
Interdisciplinarity | |
| |
| |
Bibliography | |
| |
| |
Index | |