Boyling over: a commentary on the preceding papers
GEOFFREY CANTOR a1 a1 Division of the History and Philosophy of Science, School of Philosophy, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT
When Michael Hunter first publicized the idea of ‘Psychoanalysing Robert Boyle’ I
understood that his main aim was to test three competing psychoanalytical theories against
the historical evidence provided by the life and work of Robert Boyle. Although this would
have been a valuable exercise, and one that the British Society for the History of Science
meeting partly engaged, the papers by Brett Kahr, John Clay and Karl Figlio published here
raise some far more compelling issues which I shall explore in the ensuing discussion.
Before turning to this discussion I offer a few introductory remarks.