Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T09:55:49.591Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Resisting Chemical Atomism: Duhem's Argument

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Paul Needham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Late nineteenth-century opponents of atomism questioned whether the evidence required any notion of an atom. In this spirit, Duhem developed an account of the import of chemical formulas that is clearly neutral on the atomic question rather than antiatomistic. The argument is supplemented with specific inadequacies of atomic theories of chemical combination and considerably strengthened by the theory of chemical combination provided by thermodynamics. Despite possible counterevidence available at the time, which should have tempered some of Duhem's concluding remarks, there was no atomic theory of chemical combination, which is wholly a product of the twentieth century.

Type
Chemical Bonds
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 75 , Issue 5: Proceedings of the 2006 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II: Symposia Papers. Edited by Cristina Bicchieri and Jason Alexander , December 2008 , pp. 921 - 931
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Chalmers, Alan (2005), “Atomism from the 17th to the 20th Century”, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atomism-modern.Google Scholar
Church, Alonzo (1958), “Ontological Commitment”, Ontological Commitment 55:1008–1014.Google Scholar
Duhem, Pierre ([1892] 2000), “Atomic Notation and Atomistic Hypotheses”, Foundations of Chemistry 2:127–180. Translated (with the original pagination) by Paul Needham. Originally published as “Notation atomique et hypothèses atomistiques”, Revue des questions scientifiques 31:391–457.Google Scholar
Duhem, Pierre ([1893] 1996), “The English School and Physical Theories: On a Recent Book by W. Thomson”, in Ariew, Roger and Barker, Peter (eds. and trans.), Essays in the History and Philosophy of Science. Indianapolis: Hackett. Originally published as “L’École anglaise et les théories physiques: À propos d’un livre récent de W. Thomson”, Revue des questions scientifiques 34:345–378.Google Scholar
Duhem, Pierre ([1902] 2002), “Mixture and Chemical Combination: An Essay on the Evolution of an Idea”, in Needham, Paul (ed. and trans., with original pagination), Mixture and Chemical Combination, and Related Essays. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Originally published as Le mixte et la combinaison chimique: Essai sur l’évolution d’une idée (Paris: C. Naud).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenwood, N. N. (1968), Ionic Crystals, Lattice Defects and Nonstoichiometry. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Knight, D. (1992), Ideas in Chemistry: A History of the Science. London: Athlone.Google Scholar
Kurnakow, N. S. (1914), “Verbindung und chemisches Individuum”, Verbindung und chemisches Individuum 88:109–127.Google Scholar
Meyer, Victor ([1894] 1952), “Victor Meyer”, in Leicester, Henry M. and Klickstein, Herbert S. (eds.), A Source Book in Chemistry, 1400–1900. New York: McGraw-Hill, 462–465.Google Scholar
Needham, Paul (2002), “Duhem's Theory of Mixture in the Light of the Stoic Challenge to the Aristotelian Conception”, Duhem's Theory of Mixture in the Light of the Stoic Challenge to the Aristotelian Conception 33:685–708.Google Scholar
Needham, Paul (2004), “When Did Atoms Begin to Do Any Explanatory Work in Chemistry?”, When Did Atoms Begin to Do Any Explanatory Work in Chemistry? 8:199–219.Google Scholar
Thorpe, Edward (1911), “Victor Meyer”, in Thorpe, E. (ed.), Essays in Historical Chemistry. London: Macmillan, 423–482.Google Scholar