>``...It is safest, unless one is both a professional scientist _and_ a
>professional historian/philosopher of science,
rubbish. so few people are both scientist and historian/philosopher of science that you are suggesting that no one, not even colleagues in the history or philosophy of science, should speak to his work, since they are not also scientists.
worse, to suggest this means that one should not speak to the work of any philosopher or historian of any field if one is working as student of literature or professor of literature, since that person is neither a professional scientist nor a professional historian/philosopher of science, let alone BOTH!
do you just draw the line at science? but how can you, if you're drawing the line also at historian/philosopher of science?
kelley