I have just come across a very interesting, well written and inspiring blog hosted by the Philadelphia Area Center for the History of Science. In a recent post, one of the contributing authors reflects on how to "teach curiosity in the history of science":

I would like to offer a few comments and suggestions on this important methodological question. In my opinion, curiosity is not something which can be taught. It is not something one can force on students, but something which needs to be emulated.

I remember how I myself became curious, and ultimately decided to do my doctoral research on issues related to the history of Renaissance medicine and literature: it was, in part, thanks to a course on medical humanities at the University of Geneva during which we were shown images from Charles Estienne's De dissectione partium corporis humani libri tres. This work was an anatomical book published by Simon de Colines in 1545 and  contemporary with Vesalius' De Humani corporis fabrica. On some of its very intriguing anatomical plates appear mysterious antiquarian vases...

 

Where do those vases come from? How come they were pictured with so much detail and finesse? 

These curious and unexpected objects were in fact meant to be subtle messages directed to one of the author's mentors & friends, Lazare de Baïf, the french ambassador to Venice. In 1535 Lazare de Baïf had re-published with the help of Charles Estienne a short book on antique vases, De Vasculis libellus. It is thus obvious that Estienne's picturing of the unexpected objects on the anatomical plates served as an erudite "clin d’œil" to Lazare de Baïf. It was also a clever way in which Estienne chose to show a sign of reverence & respect to the older humanist. A quotation in the margin, it worked as a coded intellectual exchange, a cyphered tweet.

Equally important (even though quite common at the time), objects like those vases served as mnemonic devices for the book's redearship, which must have included students in medicine. Those devices got all their attention and helped them rememer better. This relates to the idea that memory was like a chamber in which were stored pieces of information on imaginary shelves. The recalling was eased by the presence of such well identifiable images: a town in the background, an antique ruin, or, in this case, a mysterious vase... They facilitate the process of learning and of remembering, they help contextualise the subject (anatomy), otherwise technical and difficult to memorise. A 16th century medical student might have said to his fellows: hey, remember that dissected body with a vase between its legs? (all this in latin, of course).

That is why I think curiosity cannot be taught, it can be merely be inspired. As a student, I was taken in by the story. Of course, an anecdote like this one will not necessarily help students better understand the history of science, but it would certainly make them more curious and attentive. Just like an antique vase can do when drawn next to a dissected body...

In my view, it is important to ask the right questions, but also to tell the right stories. I think students need a base from where to begin their own curious expeditions. And for that they need to be shown images, told stories. This is what will engage them further to think and explore, then ask the right questions.

 

 

(A Very) Selective Bibliography

Charles Estienne, De dissectione partium corporis humani, 1545, available on Google Books and at the BIUM. High resolution images are to be found on the National Library of Medicine website.

Lazare de Baïf, De Vasculis libellus, a 1536 edition is available on Google Books.

***

J. Céard (éd.), La Curiosité à la Renaissance, Paris, SEDES, 1986.

H. Cazes & A. Carlino, "Plaisir de l'anatomie, plaisir du livre : La Dissection des parties du corps humain de Charles Estienne (Paris, 1546)", Cahiers de l'Association internationale des études francaises, 2003, 55. p. 251-274.

N. Kenny, The Uses of Curiosity in Early Modern France and Germany, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004.