The Scientist and the "Improver" of Technology

Abstract

SCIENCE, ACCORDING TO one of its leading historians, is systematized positive knowledge.' Technology, according to another authority, is concerned with systematic discourse about the (useful) arts. 2 Other definitions could be compiled indefinitely, not merely because of differences of viewpoint, but because the signification of the terms has evolved along with their subject matter. The evolution of technology, for example, has involved the differentiation of the from the fine arts, as suggested by the above definition. This differentiation is never perfect and becomes progressively less so as we peer into the more distant past.3 These terminological difficulties can be greatly diminished if one goes behind the abstract to the human reality and considers the scientists and the technologists themselves. Despite the fact that most, if not all, figures in the history of science and technology are to some degree involved in both, eminence in both is extremely rare. One or the other field is usually clearly dominant in any given individual, and there is a surprising degree of agreement as to who were the important scientists and who the technologists. There are other difficulties, however. In modern times science carries the connotation of the advancement of knowledge, not a mere static description of it; the scientist is one who acts to increase it. Technology, on the other hand, has been commonly understood merely to describe the useful arts as they are at any given time. The improver of technology has not always had a generally accepted name, nor has its improvement been thought of as a continuing activity until recent times. Historically, the improver has most frequently been called an inventor, but as invention has been more narrowly defined by patent law, this name