Update MAIN.md

some minor edits

Author: BruceCaron

content_development/MAIN.md

@@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ One of the biggest focuses of the Open Science movement has been the liberation
 
 However, what we know is that this ideal is often divergent from reality: Research papers remain locked behind expensive paywalls, critical research data remains hidden away on a hard-drive somewhere, methods remain scantly documented, research results cannot be reproduced, and researchers are often evaluated on senseless criteria. These are just some examples of typical practices that contribute to what might be viewed as 'closed science'; or to look at it another way, bad scientific practices. 
 
-Open Science is about changing these research practices through a shift in culture. The power of modern Web technologies enables instantaneous sharing, global collaboration, and in an unrestricted fashion. This shift in research culture is often referred to as the [**Scholarly Commons**](https://www.force11.org/group/scholarly-commons-working-group), which seeks to explore and redefine what a modern scholarly communication ecosystem should look like. (See also the [Principles of the Commons](https://github.com/OpenScienceMOOC/Module-1-Open-Principles/blob/master/Reading%20Material_Open%20Principles/Principles%20of%20the%20Commons%2C%20with%20annotations%2C%20draft%201.rtf) here).
+Open Science is about changing these research practices through a shift in culture. The power of modern Web technologies enables instantaneous sharing, global collaboration, and in an unrestricted fashion. This shift in research culture is often referred to as the [**Scholarly Commons**](https://www.force11.org/group/scholarly-commons-working-group), which seeks to explore and redefine what a modern scholarly communication ecosystem should look like. (See also the [Principles of the Commons](https://www.force11.org/scholarly-commons/principles). Accomplishing a cultural shift on a global scale is mainly done through the spread of shared cultural norms and values that are interpreted and celebrated in hundreds of local institutions: in your department, school, laboratory, university, professional association, publishing effort, open software platform developer company, funding agency, etc.. Each of these organizations fits itself into the cultural practices that members decide will work for them to become active in performing the cultural work of open science. Culture change must start from the ground up. Open science principles illuminate this ground.  
 
 The digital era is transforming the way in research is performed, and the limitations of the print era are gone. With this, new issues arise, which include the complexities of knowledge capture and communication. The framing of these complexities as a 'Commons' integrates the political, social, economic, and philosophical dimensions around knowledge.
 
@@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ However, what Open Science gives us is a new set of standards, tools, principles
 
 Science wants to be Open by default.
 
-The earliest form of Open Science can perhaps trace its origins back the 17th century, and the origin of the academic journal. [CITE FYFE etc HERE] This was catalysed by an increasing demand for the wider dissemination of scientific knowledge with the wider public. 
+The earliest form of Open Science can perhaps trace its origins back the 17th century, and the origin of the academic journal. [CITE FYFE etc HERE] This was catalysed by an increasing demand for the wider dissemination of scientific knowledge with the wider public. In the 1660s, Robert Boyle, the "father of chemistry," broke with the practices of alchemy in his early writings, e.g., [The Sceptical Chymist](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sceptical_Chymist), and promoted open experimentation (following Roger Bacon's model). Previously, alchemists occulted their methods and their knowledge died with them. What might have been called "open alchemy" became "natural philosophy" and then "science." Science was born open. 
 
 Although difficult to pin down exactly, the origins of what many call the modern 'Open Science movement' was probably catalysed by increasing frustration, debate, and distress regarding the impacts of 'closed science' (e.g., barriers such as subscription paywalls) and commercialisation on knowledge dissemination. Indeed, one of the rallying cries of the Open Science movement is that taxpayers who already paid to fund research should not be having to pay again to read the results. The term Open Science itself appears to have been coined by [Steve Mann in 1998](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_science#Coining_of_phrase_%22OpenScience%22).