“What does Adrian Johns’ think is wrong with Elizabeth Eisenstein’s characterization of the impact of print on the development of science?”

  “What does Adrian Johns’ think is wrong with Elizabeth Eisenstein’s characterization of the impact of print on the development of science?” (Please note: we are discussing Eisenstein’s story from September 18th - 24th, and Johns’ story the following week.) To be be successful, you’ll need to do several things (I strongly recommend doing these in the following order):   ● Explain (aka summarize, in your own words) what Eisenstein thinks print contributes to the development of modern science. This should be 1 or 2 paragraphs. ● To illustrate that, use Tycho Brahe and Galileo as examples.1 or 2 paragraphs each. ● What is Adrian Johns’ main critique of Eisenstein’s argument and what does he say to explain and substantiate his point? (Summarize in your own words, 1 or 2 paragraphs). ● How does he interpret the examples of Tycho Brahe and Galileo, e.g., what does they think they illustrate instead? Note that this part is an explicit comparison with Eisenstein. (1-2 paragraphs each.​) Other​ ​grading​ ​criteria​ ​(continued​ ​on​ ​next​ ​page) ● The paper must be between 700 - 1000 words. ● You may only cite Eisenstein or Johns - stick to these course materials.