Max Planck Institute for the History of Science

In the AI Story

The Institute's departmental structure under Daston emphasized thematic research programs rather than traditional disciplinary divisions. Departments focused on specific problems — the history of experimentation, the history of the image in science, the history of scientific observation, the history of data — allowed researchers from different disciplinary backgrounds to collaborate on sustained investigations. The model produced a series of landmark collaborative publications, including Histories of Scientific Observation (2011), Science in the Archives (2017), and The Moral Authority of Nature (2004).

Daston's directorship was notable for the Institute's international orientation. It hosted visiting scholars from across the world, supported translations of key texts between German, English, French, and other languages, and cultivated research networks that extended the Institute's influence far beyond Berlin. The Institute became a destination for scholars seeking to develop sophisticated historical approaches to contemporary scientific and technological questions, and its graduates and visiting fellows have populated history-of-science programs across Europe and North America.

The Institute's research programs during Daston's directorship were particularly influential in three areas. The history of observation traced how scientific communities have learned to see reliably across different periods and instruments — work that has proven directly relevant to analyzing AI-mediated observation. The history of the scientific image extended Daston and Galison's Objectivity framework into detailed studies of specific representational technologies. And the history of data developed the genealogical approach to quantitative knowledge that has become foundational for understanding the historical and institutional conditions under which AI training corpora are constructed.

The Institute continues to operate after Daston's retirement from the directorship in 2019. She remains Director Emerita and continues to contribute to its research programs, but the distinctive character of the Institute under her leadership — the combination of historical depth, philosophical sophistication, and attention to contemporary implications — reflects a specific moment in the history of the history of science, one whose influence extends well beyond the Institute itself.

Origin

The Institute was founded in 1994 as part of the Max Planck Society's expansion following German reunification. Its founding directors included Lorenz Krüger (who died shortly after the Institute's establishment), Jürgen Renn, and Lorraine Daston. Daston's department focused on the history of the moral authority of nature and subsequently on the history of epistemic virtues — research programs that produced the framework at the center of her AI volume.

The Institute's funding model — secure long-term support from the German federal government through the Max Planck Society — allowed researchers to undertake projects on scales that would have been impossible under typical grant funding. Multi-year collaborative investigations, sustained archival research, and the slow accumulation of expertise in specific domains — all depended on the institutional security the Max Planck model provides.

Key Ideas

Founding director role. Daston shaped the Institute from its inception, establishing its intellectual orientation and research programs.

Thematic rather than disciplinary organization. The Institute's structure encouraged sustained collaborative work on specific problems across disciplinary boundaries.

International research community. Visiting scholars from across the world extended the Institute's approach across global history-of-science networks.

Three influential research programs. The history of observation, the history of the scientific image, and the history of data shaped contemporary approaches to AI-relevant questions.

Institutional model supported long-term work. The Max Planck funding structure enabled research programs whose scale and duration would be impossible under typical grant funding.