ABSTRACT
Images in science, or science images, as we prefer to call them, have been very influential in the history of the modern sciences. Yet, until recently, very little was known about them. The conditions of their emergence, genesis, and continued production, their fashions, impact on research, philosophy, and the general perception of nature had attracted surprisingly little interest (surveys of recent literature are Daum 1998; Kretschmann 2003; Oels 2005). This indifference was often associated with contempt for the visual in relation to abstract discourse. In recent years, this has changed. There is a new uncertainty about the relation between images and knowledge brought about by new theories of the sciences as well as a new type of images. The computer generated digital images have led to an intensive debate about the relationship between images and the sciences. The end of an epoch of illustrations in the sciences is undoubtedly approaching. Iconoclashes were always not only destructive but also linked to moves toward the construction of new images and techniques of representation (for a detailed and instructive illustration of the ambivalence of iconoclasm see Latour and Weibel 2002). More often than not, the tearing apart of images was implicated in a discarding of systems of belief and knowledge and was followed by enthroning new ideals, theories, and deities. The sciences were no exception and the current changes of science images seem closely related to a change of the image of science.
