461 



engineering techniques that comprise astronautics. 

 Such historians frequently are former space program 

 participants and/or are sponsored by NASA's own 

 history program. Devotees of technical history often 

 dismiss the more popular histories of journalists or 

 political historians because of the generalists' lack of 

 technical expertise. To a degree, such a view is valid- 

 problems of causation in the history of technology often 

 are warped by writers unfamiliar with the technical 

 constraints on policy. 



Space age history analyzed as history of science forms 

 a third category. Like all modern technology, spacecraft 

 evolved initially because of advances in pure science — 

 whether the mathematics of orbital mechanics, the chem- 

 istry of high-energy cryogenic fuels, or the physics of 

 solid state electronics. Once satellite launching became 

 routine, space science (the continuing pursuit of all our 

 familiar sciences from the laboratory of space) stimulated 

 revolutionary advances in numerous fields. For example, 

 the astronomical and astrophysical discoveries alone are 

 epochal. To the historian of science, such developments 

 constitute the stuff of space age history, and the engi- 

 neering, feats of the rocketeers pale by comparison. 



Finally, there are the historians who focus on the 

 impact of space technology and exploration on political, 

 social, and economic issues. To be sure, the interests 

 even within this group are numerous and include the 

 impacts of space activity on; international strategy and 

 law, government science policy and organization, domestic 

 economies and social change, even cultural and religious 

 values. But these social-scientist space historians represent 

 only one group among many, and works from other 

 historians are indispensable for defining the precise nature 

 of the phenomena that social scientists presume to trace 

 through the "cloud chamber" of society. 



This paper focuses on issues of interest to the latter 

 group of historians, whose approach is most relevant to 

 the users of this book. 



B. Definition of History 



History is a multifarious discipline and hence can be 

 defined only in the broadest and least distinctive terms. 

 History encompasses quite literally everything that human 

 beings have ever done, thought, or experienced. As an 

 academic discipline, history represents the art (not 

 science) of establishing and explaining past events: its 

 scope is therefore potentially limitless. The problem in 

 history is not divining which issues historical research 

 can help us understand or what questions it can help us 

 answer; rather, the task is pruning out all the data and 

 questions of less relevance to whatever problem is at 

 hand. Therefore, history can be described as a discipline 

 of selection, and ultimately the value of a given historical 

 work is defined by what material is le/l out. 



C. The Historical Method and Space Technology 

 Research 



The unique comprehensiveness of history (vis-a-vis 

 other disciplines) in regard to Shuttle technologies consti- 

 tutes a great handicap and a great advantage. History'-s 



fluid and empirical nature acts as the handicap of the 

 historical method in a project analyzing the past and 

 future social impact of technology. The historian seeks 

 the particular, not the general, and tries to identify and 

 explain those qualities that make a given phenomenon 

 different from all others. On the other hand, the social 

 scientist seeks to identify and explain those qualities that 

 make a given phenomenon like others. Thus, the histo- 

 rian views with suspicion precisely the sorts of models or 

 general laws that represent the very building blocks of 

 the .sociologist, economist, or political scientist. To the 

 historian, it is never self-evident how a given datum 

 ought to be understood in a historical context, because 

 both the event and the historian are unique. Consequently, 

 a given fact never will carry the same weight for two 

 different historians nor be subject to the same interpre- 

 tation. Without probing more deeply into the epistemo- 

 logical vagaries of historical work, analysts simply should 

 keep in mind that history represents a product of the 

 imagination, even of instinct. Of course, historians try to 

 gather data on the past in a more or less scientific 

 fashion, but arranging and making sense of the raw mate- 

 rial is not an act of calculus dictated by some general 

 theory or model, but rather an act of creation molded by 

 the historian's insight into the unique circumstances of 

 the historical moment. 



The above qualities create difficulties when historians 

 work with other social scientists or analyze events as 

 current as the space program. 



Nevertheless, the nature of history also produces an 

 advantage. History is an integrative discipline. By training 

 and instinct, the histori.in tends to; integrate knowledge 

 about the various classes of human endeavors (political, 

 economic, social, intellectual) at a given historical time 

 and place; break down historical phenomena into constit- 

 uent parts, according to those same classes; and then 

 relate the parts to the whole. As a result, the alert 

 historian naturally would: become familiar with the 

 chronological history of space technology and policy; 

 think at once of the political, economic, and other factors 

 relevant to the origin and growth of the technology; and 

 finally seek to establish empirically the causal links among 

 such factors. Therefore, technology, in the context of 

 this paper, would not he a "given" to be applied t'o 

 "political life" or "the economy," but rather would 

 become a mediator within the complex organism of the 

 nation. 



By way of introduction, a final issue must be addressed: 

 the troublesome question of history's role in aiding anal- 

 ysis of the future social impact of relevant Shuttle-derived 

 technologies. After all. history focuses on the past. Mo.st 

 historians are skeptical ot historical study even of events 

 that occurred during the last thirty years, believing it 

 impossible to obtain perspective and adequate sources on 

 such recent happenings. Thus, the entire space age lies 

 outside the "prt>per" re.ilm of historical studv. and histo- 

 rians take professional risks when they concentrate on 

 the space age. But the Shuttle and its social impact lie 

 in the future. Other social .sciences may claim .some 



