Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
William Fletcher Barrett (1844–1925) has long been recognised for his key role in the foundation of the Society for Psychical Research in 1882, but this came after years of working as a physicist and psychical researcher between Ireland and Britain, conducting mesmeric experiments, maintaining correspondence, and sharing research ideas at forums like the British Association for the Advancement of Science. This article re-evaluates Barrett’s career by focusing on his networks, projects, and organisations in Ireland. These acted as bridges connecting his work as a teacher of physics with his work as a psychical researcher and investigator of spiritualism. In doing so, this article also contributes to the history of spiritualism in Ireland by demonstrating the rich connections which existed between scientists, intellectuals, and amateur investigators in the area of spiritualism and psychical research.
William Fletcher Barrett (1844–1925) has long been recognised for his key role in the foundation of the Society for Psychical Research in 1882, but this came after years of working as a physicist and psychical researcher between Ireland and Britain, conducting mesmeric experiments, maintaining correspondence, and sharing research ideas at forums like the British Association for the Advancement of Science. This article re-evaluates Barrett’s career by focusing on his networks, projects, and organisations in Ireland. These acted as bridges connecting his work as a teacher of physics with his work as a psychical researcher and investigator of spiritualism. In doing so, this article also contributes to the history of spiritualism in Ireland by demonstrating the rich connections which existed between scientists, intellectuals, and amateur investigators in the area of spiritualism and psychical research.
In a world of accelerating environmental crises, global pandemics and seemingly unstoppable datafication of anything that moves, thinks or feels, the politics of science and technology are pervasive. In this first of three progress reports on the geographies of science and technology, I home in on some definitional questions which an account of anything like a new or emerging subfield must necessarily concern itself. I examine how geographers have addressed the spatial effects of the making and unmaking of boundaries between science, technology and their various outsides. While work on historical and contemporary geographies of technoscience has often pulled in slightly different directions, I identify some promising convergences around questions of political economy and on the topic of scale as an emergent property of technoscientific practices. New attention is also falling on the spatial practices through which technoscience gets plugged into wider worlds, such as politics and policymaking, while geographers have also been busy disrupting, in a more experimental mode, conventional boundaries and hierarchies of technoscientific practice. Finally, the report examines recent and welcome efforts to convene new conversations around the geography of technology but cautions against the potential seduction of the new, the innovative and the ‘disruptive’. Important recent work in cultural geography has purposively unsettled assumed hierarchies of ‘high’ and ‘low’ tech, new and old, and suggests that any nascent subfield of ‘geography of technology’ needs to reflexively attend to how boundaries get drawn around ‘technology’, and with what effects.
In 1870, the Belgian Adolphe Quetelet wrote in his seminal scientific work Anthropometrié that “the average man characterises the nation to which he belongs.” An obsession with the “national” characterized the field of anthropometry, which scientists such as Quetelet pioneered in the Francophone world; their techniques were quickly adopted and adapted elsewhere—by Francis Galton in London and by Aleš Hrdlička, Earnest Hooton, and Franz Boas in the United States. Ireland played a surprisingly central role in this burgeoning new field of international scientific enquiry, which quickly became focused on connecting racial and criminal “degeneracy” under the guise of a scientific search for the “normal,” “average,” or “typical” example of any given ethnic or social group. This article connects two major Irish research projects, the Dublin Anthropometric Lab at Trinity College Dublin (1888–99) and the physical anthropology strand of the Harvard Irish Study (1934–36), to show that Ireland was an important node in the network of scientists and researchers who constructed the discourses of global racial science.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.