At the same time, since the contributions of Thomas Kuhn historians have developed a critical attitude towards formal attempts and methodological recipes for epistemic demarcation and justification of scientific practice. Up to now string theory has offered a new way to view particles as different excitations of the same fundamental object.
However, the strings of string theory, like more general extended objects -e.g., the membranes in brane theory-, can be considered to be made of more fundamental point-like objects. History of science also teaches that times of conflict are often times of innovation, in which novel scholarly identities may come into being. In string theory the strings are fundamental objects and cannot be made of anything. Just as Einstein is claimed by both sides, historiography offers examples of both successful and unsuccessful non-empirical science. At bottom, the conflict centers on the question: who is a proper physicist? To illustrate and understand the differing opinions about proper practice and identity, we discuss different appreciations of epistemic virtues and explanation among string theorists and their critics, and how these have been sourced in accounts of Einstein's biography. 'Lee Smolin provides a much needed, enlightening and engagingly written antidote to string-theory hype.' -David Deutsch, Oxford University, author of The Fabric of Reality 'If you want to think in new ways about the interconnected universe around you, read Lee Smolins provocative, inspiring book. This paper argues that this conflict is really about who holds authority in making rational judgment in theoretical physics. Yet, some of their recent critics deny this. String theorists are certain that they are practicing physicists.