C. P. Snow’s “The Two Cultures” controversially contrasted science and literature, suggesting that neither scientists nor literary intellectuals have much in common with, and seldom bother speaking to, the other. Responding to Snow, Michael Polanyi argued that specialization has made modern culture, not twofold but manifold. In his major work, Personal Knowledge, Polanyi explained that branches of modern culture have personal knowing and knowledge in common , and there is extensive cross-pollination of ideas. He also, in this book, saw the branches of culture as disparate intellectual frameworks that are divorced from one another.
Allen, R. ( 2000, March). The cognitive functions of emotion. Appraisal, 3(1), 38-47.
2.
Collini, S. ( 1993). Introduction. In C. P. Snow (Ed.), The two cultures (Canto ed.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
3.
Edgerton, D. ( 2005). C. P. Snow as anti-historian of British science: Revisiting the technocractic moment, 1959-1964. History of Science, 43, 187-208.
4.
Horney, K. ( 1939). New ways in psychoanalysis. London , England: Kegan Paul &Trench, Trubner.
5.
Koestler, A. ( 1950). Contribution. In R. Crossman (Ed.), The god that failed (pp. 15-75). London , England: Hamilton.
6.
Koestler, A. ( 1959). The sleepwalkers. New York, NY: Macmillan.
7.
Polanyi, M. ( 1958). Personal knowledge. London, England: Rout-ledge & Kegan Paul.
8.
Polanyi, M. (1959). The two cultures . Encounter, 13, 61-64 [The essay also appears in M. Grene (Ed.). ( 1969). Knowing and being (pp. 40-46). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.]
9.
Richmond, S. ( 1998, August). The two cultures problem. Paper presented at the 20th World Congress of Philosophy, Boston, MA. Retrieved from http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Scie/ScieRich.htm
10.
Snow, C.P. ( 1959). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
