Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:22:32.346Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Filling the Space of Possibilities: Eighteenth-Century Chemistry's Transition from Art to Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Lissa Roberts
Lissa Roberts
Affiliation:
Department of HistorySan Diego State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper charts eighteenth-century chemistry's transition from its definition as an art to its proclaimed status as a science. Both the general concept of art and specific practices of eighteenth-century chemists are explored to account for this transition. As a disciplined activity, art orients practitioners' attention toward particular directions and away from others, providing a structured space of possibilities within which their discipline develops. Consequently, while chemists throughout the eighteenth century aspired to reveal nature's “true voice,” the path of their investigations was directed by and toward their laboratory manipulations. So long as the chemical community maintained an ethos of polite cooperation and eschewed theoretical wrangling, this point was hidden by a rhetoric of “matter of fact” reporting. But as “facts” mounted in the 1770s and 1780s, especially in pneumatic chemistry, cooperation gave way to contention as chemists sought to name and organize their findings without the guidance of a communally accepted “natural” system. Lavoisier and his fellow “new” chemists offered a forceful solution to this dilemma by introducing a revolutionary network of theories, nomenclature, and instruments that unabashedly fused the productive manipulation of their laboratory work with what they claimed as the structure and activity of nature.

Type
Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , Autumn 1993 , pp. 511 - 553
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

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

Albury, W. R. 1972. “The Logic of Condillac and the Structure of French Chemical and Biological Theory 1780–1801.” Ph.D. diss. Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar
Anderson, Wilda. 1984. Between the Library and the Laboratory: The Language of Chemistry in Eighteenth-Century France. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Uni versity Press.Google Scholar
Baumé, Antoine. 1773. Chymie expérimentale et raisonnée. Paris.Google Scholar
Bensaude-Vincent, Bernadette. 1983. “A propos de ‘Méthode de nomenclature chimique': Esquisse historique suivie du texte de 1787.” Cahiers d'Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences 6.Google Scholar
Bergman, Torbern. 1780–1985. Opusculeschymiquesetphysiques.… Translated by Guyton, de Morveau. Paris.Google Scholar
Bergman, Torbern. 1783. An Essay on the Usefulness of Chemistry and Its Application to the Various Occasions of Life. Translated by Jeremy, Bentham. London.Google Scholar
Bergman, Torbern. 1785. A Dissertation on Elective Attractions. London.Google Scholar
Bergman, Torbern. 1788. Physical and Chemical Essays. Translated by Edmund, Cullen. London.Google Scholar
Boerhaave, Herman. 1735. Elements of Chemistry, vols. 1 and 2. Translated by Dallowe, Timothy, M.D. London.Google Scholar
Christie, J. R. R., and Golinski, J. V. 1982. “The Spreading of the Word: New Directions in the Historiography of Chemistry.” History of Science 20:235–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Condillac, Etienne Bonnot de. [1746] 1971. An Essay on the Origin of Human Knowledge. Edited by Weyent, Robert G.; translated by Thomas Nugent. Gainesville: Scholars Facsimiles and Reprints.Google Scholar
Condillac, Etienne Bonnot de. 1980. Logic. Translated by Albury, W. R. New York: Abaris.Google Scholar
Crosland, Maurice. 1973. “Lavoisier's Theory of Acidity.” Isis 64:306–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crosland, Maurice. 1978. Historical Studies in the Language of Chemistry. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Dagognet, François. 1969. Tableaux et langages de la chimie. Paris: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. 1973. L'Archéologie du frivole. Paris: Galilee.Google Scholar
Gillispie, Charles C.. ed. 1970–1980. Dictionary of Scient Biography. 16 vols. New York: Scribners.Google Scholar
Fourcroy, Antoine-Francois. [1782] 1785. Elementary Lectures on Chemistry and Natural History. Translated by Elliot, Thomas. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Fric, René. 1960. “Contribution a l'étude de l'évolution des idées de Lavoisier sur la nature de l'air et sur la calcination des métaux.” Archives Internationales d'Histoire des Sciences 47:155–62.Google Scholar
Furet, François. 1978. Penser la Révolution Française. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Galison, Peter. 1985. “Bubble Chambers and the Experimental Workplace. In Observation, Experiment and Hypothesis in Modern Physical Science, edited by Peter, Achinstein and Owen, Hannaway, 309–73. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Geoffroy, E. F. 1718. “Table des différents rapports observes en chimie entre différentes substances.” Mémoires de l'Académie royale des sciences, 202–12. Paris.Google Scholar
Golinski, Jan. 1992. Science as Public Culture: Chemistry and Enlightenment in Britain, 1760–1820. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gough, J. B. 1988. “The Fulfillment of the Stahlian Revolution.” Osiris 4:15–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guerlac, Henry. 1976. “Chemistry as a Branch of Physics: Laplace's Collaboration with Lavoisier.” Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 7:193–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guerlac, Henry. 1982. Memoir on Heat. A translation of Mémoire sur la chaleur (1783) by Lavoisier and Laplace. New York: Neale Watson Academic Publications.Google Scholar
de Morveau, Guyton, Louis, Bernard. 1782. “Mémoires sur les dénominations chymiques.” Observations sur la Physique. 19:370–82.Google Scholar
de Morveau, Guyton, Louis, Bernard, Hughes, Maret, and Jean, Durande. 1777. Elémens de chymie théorique et pratique.… Dijon.Google Scholar
de Morveau, Guyton, Louis, Bernard, de Lavoisier, Antoine Laurent, Antoine-François, Fourcroy, and Berthollet, Claude Louis. 1787. Méthode de nomencla ture chymique. Paris.Google Scholar
Hannaway, Owen. 1975. The Chemists and the Word. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Heidegger, Martin. 1962. Being and Time. Translated by MacQuerrie, John and Robinson, Edward. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Heidegger, Martin. 1977. “The Question Concerning Technology.” In The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays, translated by Lovitt, William. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Holmes, F. L. 1985. Lavoisier and the Chemistry of Life. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, F. L. 1989. Eighteenth-Century Chemistry as an investigative Enterprise. Berkeley, Calif.: Office for History of Science and Technology.Google Scholar
Hufbauer, Karl. 1982.The Formation of the German Chemical Community (1720–1795). Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, Lynn. 1984. Politics, Culture and Class in the French Revolution. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Keir, James. 1789. The First Part of a Dictionary of Chemistry. Birmingham: Pearson and Rollason.Google Scholar
Kirwan, Richard. 1789. An Essay on Phlogiston. London.Google Scholar
Antoine Laurent de, Lavoisier. 1789. Traité élémentaire de chimie. Paris.Google Scholar
Antoine Laurent de, Lavoisier. [1790] 1965 Elements of Chemistry. Translated by Kerr, Robert. Introduction by Douglas McKie. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Antoine Laurent de, Lavoisier. 1862–1993. Oeuvres. Paris.Google Scholar
Antoine Laurent de, Lavoisier, and Marquis de Laplace, Pierre Simon [1783] 1982. Mémoire sur la chaleur. Translated as Memoir on Heat by Guerlac, Henry. New York: Neale Watson.Google Scholar
LeClerc, George-Louis, de Buffon, Comte. 1767. Natural History, vol. 10. London.Google Scholar
Leicester, H. M., and Klickstein, H. S., eds. 1968. A Sourcebook in Chemistry 1400–1900. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lundgren, Anders. 1988. “The New Chemistry in Sweden: The Debate That Wasn't.” Osiris 4:146–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McEvoy, John. 1978. “Joseph Priestley, ‘Aerial Philosopher’: Metaphysics and Methodology in Priestley's Chemical Thought, Parts 1–3.” Ambix 25:1–55, 93–116, 153–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McEvoy, John. 1979. “Joseph Priestley, ‘Aerial Philosopher,' Part 4.” Ambix 26:16–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meihado, Evan. 1985. “Chemistry, Physics, and the Chemical Revolution.” Isis 76:195–211.Google Scholar
Ozouf, Mona. 1976. La Féte révolutionaire, 1790–1799. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Perrin, Carleton. 1981. “The Triumph of the Antiphiogistians.” In The Analytic Spirit: Essays in the History of Science in Honor of Henry Guerlac, edited by Harry, Woolf, 40–63. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Pinch, Trevor. 1985. “Toward an Analysis of Scientific Observation: The Exter nality and Evidential Significance of Observational Reports in Physics.” Social Studies of Science 15:3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priestley, Joseph. 1767. The History and Present State of Electricity, with Original Experiments. London.Google Scholar
Priestley, Joseph. 1790. Experiments and Observations of Different Kinds of Air…. In Three Volumes: Being the Former Six Volumes…, Vol. 1. Birmingham.Google Scholar
Priestley, Joseph. 1802. The Doctrine of Phlogiston Established and That of the Decomposition of Water Refuted, 2nd ed. Northumberland, Pa.Google Scholar
Roberts, Lissa. 1990. “Setting the Table: The History of Eighteenth-Century Chemistry as Read through Its Tables.” In The Literary Structure of Scient Argument: Historical Studies, edited by Peter, Dear, 99–132. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, Lissa. 1991. “A Word and the World: The Significance of Naming the Calorimeter.” Isis 82:199–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Lissa. 1992. “Condillac, Lavoisier, and the Instrumentalization of Science.” In The Chemical Revolution: Context and Practices, edited by Lissa, Roberts. The Eighteenth Century: Theory and Interpretation 33:252–71.Google Scholar
Maximilien de, Robespierre. 1968. “Report on the Principles of Political Morality.” In The French Revolution, edited by Paul, Beik, 276–88. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Schaffer, Simon. 1989. “Glassworks: Newton's Prisms and the Uses of Experiment.” In The Uses of Experiment, edited by David, Gooding, Trevor, Pinch, and Simon, Schaffer, 67–104. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shapin, Steven. 1984. “Pump and Circumstance: Robert Boyle's Literary Technology.” Social Studies of Science 14:481–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven. 1989. “The Transparent Artisan.” American Scientist 77:554–63.Google Scholar
Shaw, Peter. 1734. Chemical Lectures. London.Google Scholar
Siegfried, Robert. 1982. “Lavoisier's Table of Simple Substances: Its Origin and Interpretation.” Ambix 29:29–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stahl, G. E. 1730. Philosophical Principles of Universal Chemistry. Translated by Shaw, Peter. London.Google Scholar
Starobinski, Jean. 1982. 1789:The Emblems of Reason. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.Google Scholar
Taton, René, ed. 1986. Enseignement et d des sciences en France au XVIIIe siècle. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar
Venel, G. F. 1753. “Chymie.” In Encyclopédie, edited by Denis, Diderot and Jean, d'Alembert, 3:408–37. Paris.Google Scholar