226 Kline
phasizes their multiple, contested meanings. In regard to the term “cul-
ture,” he says, “these variations, of whatever kind, necessarily involve
alternative views of the activities, relationships and processes which this
complex word indicates. The complexity, that is to say, is not fi nally in the
word but in the problems which its variations of use signify.” The history
of such keywords as “culture” and “society” reveal that “earlier and the
later senses [of the word] coexist, or become actual alternatives in which
problems of contemporary belief and affi liation are contested.” In study-
ing British culture and society after World War II, Williams discovered
that the changing meanings of the keywords “culture” and “society” were
inextricably bound up with the very changes he wished to describe.^3
English- speaking scientists and engineers were just as creative and
combative in employing keywords in their debates. In contesting the re-
lationships between their respective fi elds, they employed a variety of
terms: “science,” the “useful arts,” “technology,” “abstract science,” “pure
science,” “practical science,” “applied science,” “fundamental science,”
“basic science,” and “engineering science.”^4 Rather than discuss the usages
of all of these words, this chapter focuses on periods of contestation cen-
tered around three key phrases: “pure and applied science,” “science and
technology,” and “engineering science.” I draw mainly on public speeches
made by physical scientists and engineers in the United States from the
1880s to the 1960s. My aim is not to answer the question, what was or is
the relationship between what we now call “science and technology,” but
rather to explore how and why these discourse communities used the key
phrases “pure and applied science,” “science and technology,” and “en-
gineering science” to mark off the boundaries between their disciplines
in this period.^5 I will also briefl y discuss how changes in meaning of the
keyword “technology” fi gured into those debates.PURE AND APPLIED SCIENCE: COMPLEMENTARY BOUNDARY WORK
The phrase “pure and applied science,” rather than “science and tech-
nology,” dominated discussions among scientists and engineers about
the relationship between systematic knowledge and the useful arts in the
United States from the early 1880s to the 1930s.^6 The term “technology”
was not part of these debates in the nineteenth century because at that
time it chiefl y meant the “scientifi c study of the practical or industrial
arts,” a meaning popularized by the names of such prominent technical
colleges as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, founded in 1865.
This meaning had been used earlier in the century by Boston botanist and