Anastasios Brenner

French Studies In The Philosophy Of Science

Having examined previous volumes of the Boston Studies series devoted to different countries, and having discussed the best way to present contemporary research in France, we have arrived at a careful selection of 15 participants, including the organizers. Our aim is to bring together philosophers and practicing scientist from the major institutions of the country, both universities and research centers. The areas of research represented here cover a wide spectrum of sciences, from mathematics and physics to the life sciences, as well as linguistics and economics. This selection is a showcase of French philosophy of science, illustrating the different methods employed: logico-linguistic analysis, rational reconstruction and historical inquiry. These participants have the ability to relate their research both to the French tradition and current discussions on the international scene. Also included is a substantial historical introduction, explaining the development of philosophy of science in France, the various schools of thought and methods as well as the major concepts and their significance.

Pierre Duhem: Mixture and Chemical Combination and Related Essays. Edited and translated, with an Introduction, by Paul Needham

The following is an essay review of Paul Needhams translation of Pierre Duhems Lemixte et la combinaison chimique and a numberof other essays. In this review we describe theintent and general features of Le mixte and try to place it in the larger context of Duhemsprogram for energetics. The long essay (Essay3) opposing Marcellin Berthelotsthermochemistry is singled out for detailedcommentary, since it gives Duhems reasons forendorsing Josiah Willard Gibbss chemicalstatics. We argue that a chemical mechanics ofa Gibbsian sort, defended in Le mixte and otheressays in this volume, was the inspiration for,and basis of, Duhems energetics. Needhamswelcome translations help an English-languageaudience to better understand the basiccontours of Duhems important, if ultimatelymisguided, project. We conclude with somecomments on the difficulties in translatingDuhem and on the quality of the translationsNeedham has provided.

The French Connection: Conventionalism and the Vienna Circle

In 1929 Moritz Schlick and those scholars he had brought together came to realize that they had given rise to something entirely new, so the text of the Vienna Circle Manifesto has it. What was novel was the conception of the world, henceforth scientific. Or as we may put it otherwise: a discipline had been established, the philosophy of science, that is a reflection on science no longer subordinate to traditional theory of knowledge and metaphysics. The text goes on to explain why such a conception arose geographically where it did: “That Vienna was specially suitable ground for [the development of the spirit of a scientific conception of the world] is historically understandable” 1. The Vienna Circle Manifesto proceeds to enumerate the multifarious intellectual movements that were brought together at the beginning of the 20th century in the city of Vienna. Is it irrelevant or untimely to emphasize this cosmopolitan spirit? I believe, on the contrary, that cosmopolitanism provides both a lesson about philosophical creativity and a key for understanding the vitality of Viennese philosophy: the achievements of the Vienna Circle were the result of an exceptional open-mindedness on the part of its members.

Holism a century ago: The elaboration of Duhem's thesis

Duhem first expounds the holistic thesis, according to which an experimental test always involves several hypotheses, in articles dating from the 1890s. Poincarés analysis of a recent experiment in optics provides the incentive, but Duhem generalizes this analysis and develops a highly original methodological position. He is led to reject inductivism. I will endeavor to show the crucial role history of science comes to play in the development of Duhems holism.

Is There a Cultural Barrier Between Historical Epistemology and Analytic Philosophy of Science

One of the difficulties facing the philosopher of science today is the divide between historical epistemology and analytic philosophy of science. For over half a century these two traditions have followed independent and divergent paths. Historical epistemology, which originated in France in the early twentieth century, has recently been reformulated by a number of scholars such as Lorraine Daston, Ian Hacking, and Hans-Jörg Rheinberger. Elaborating novel historical methods, they seek to provide answers to major questions in the field. In the light of this situation, my article examines the cultural barrier that explains the uneasy relationship between the two traditions. This barrier hinges on a number of factors—institutional, political and social—that are bound up with the philosophical issues in question. By resorting both to historical study and logical analysis, the new historical epistemology incites us to move beyond a rather sterile antagonism.

Epistemology Historicized: The French Tradition

Following the standard view, scientific theories are formal systems, which receive empirical content by way of certain correspondence rules. The task of philosophy of science is then to make explicit the structure of such systems. In contrast to this view, one can point to the French tradition in philosophy of science. What characterizes this tradition is recourse to historical study, which has evolved from an attempt to bridge the fields of philosophy of science and history of science to an endeavor to integrate of conceptual and historical methods. My aim in this paper is to explore the emergence of historical epistemology in France and its later revival at an international level. Attention is directed at the presuppositions and motivations underlying such an approach.

Chemistry and French Philosophy of Science. A Comparison of Historical and Contemporary Views

Philosophers of science have shown over the past several years a growing interest in chemistry. Chemistry has always held an important place in French philosophy of science. By confronting our respective experiences as philosopher and chemist, we bring out the specificity of the French tradition. The insight provided thereby will allow us to examine afresh some philosophical problems raised by contemporary science: changing conceptions of matter, laboratory practice as opposed to mathematical representation as well as the impact of computer modeling and atomic microscopy on our knowledge of the behavior of matter.

Reflections on Chimisso: French Philosophy of Science and the Historical Method

Over the past several years there has emerged a collective and conscious effort aiming to understand the history of philosophy of science. This has led to the renewed examination of the Vienna Circle and logical positivism, which is considered as one of the main sources of philosophy of science in the English-speaking world. Yet there have also been attempts to explore the development of other schools of thought. A study of the French tradition raises several questions, in particular the reception of this tradition and its salient recourse to a historical approach. Attention has turned from the well-known Bachelardian school to earlier philosophers.