Abstract
Duhem regarded the history of physical science as carrying a twofold lesson for the practicing physicist. First, history revealed the slow, groping, yet continuous development of physical theory toward a true description of the relations among natural entities. Second, history also unmasked false explanations and metaphysical beliefs that might seduce the unwary scientist into following an unfruitful line of research. This paper brings forth the central images underlying Duhem's historiographical project and uses the papers by S. Menn and W. A. Wallace to ask what Duhem's enterprise actually meant in practice. I argue that the main question is the following: What is to count as the proper space of historical meaning and explanation? ‘Strong’ Duhemians, such as S. Menn, purchase the longue durée at the cost of making historical agents into completely passive transmitters of conceptual homologies; ‘weak’ Duhemians, such as W. A. Wallace, shorten the temporal distance between agents and permit thereby a modicum of conflict and negotiation within physical theory while still seeking to preserve long-term conceptual genealogies. Both positions, it is argued, allow insufficient room for actors' categories to determine the space of cultural analysis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ariew, R. and P. Barker: 1986, ‘Duhem and Maxwell: A Case-Study in the Interrelations of History of Science and Philosophy of Science’, in A. Fine and P. Machamer (eds.), PSA 1986, Proceedings of the 1986 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, vol. 1, Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, Michigan, pp. 145–58.
Bosmans, H.: 1914, ‘Review of Pierre Duhem: 1906, Etudes sur Leonard de Vinci, A. Hermann, Paris’, in Revue des Questions Scientifiques 76, 529–37.
Chartier, R.: 1987, The Cultural Uses of Print in Early Modern France, Lydia G. Cochrane (trans.), Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Dear, P.: 1988, Mersenne and the Learning of the Schools, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York.
Dufourcq, A.: 1913, ‘Les origines de la science moderne d'après les decouvertes recentes’, Revue des deux monde 16, 349–78.
Duhem, P.: 1962, The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory, P. P. Wiener (trans.), with a foreword by Prince L. de Broglie, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey; first published in 1914.
Duhem, P.: 1969, To Save the Phenomena, An Essay on the Idea of Physical Theory from Plato to Galileo, E. Doland and C. Maschler (trans.), with an Introductory Essay by S. L. Jaki, University of Chicago Press, Chicago; first published in 1908.
Fabiani, J.-L.: 1983, ‘Les programmes, les hommes et les oeuvres: professeurs de philosophie en classe et en ville au tournant du siecle’, Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales 47–48, 1–20.
Fleck, L.: 1979, Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact, F. Bradley and T. J. Trenn (trans.). T. J. Trenn and R. K. Merton (eds.), foreword by T. S. Kuhn, Chicago University Press, Chicago; first published in 1935.
Funkenstein, A.: 1986, Theology and the Scientific Imagination from the Middle Ages to the Seventeenth Century, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Gilbert, W.: 1958, De Magnete, P. F. Mottelay (trans.), Dover, New York; first published in London, 1600.
Goldstein, D. S.: 1968, ‘Official Philosophies in Modern France: The Example of Victor Cousin’, Journal of Social History 1, 259–79.
Holton, G.: 1973, Thematic Origins of Modern Science, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Jaki, S. L.: 1984, Uneasy Genius: The Life and Work of Pierre Duhem, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague/Boston.
Kuhn, T. S.: 1957, The Copernican Revolution, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Martin, R. N. D.: 1987, ‘Saving Duhem and Galileo: Duhemian Methodology and the Saving of the Phenomena’, History of Science 25, 301–19.
Martin, R. N. D.: 1990, ‘Duhem and the Origins of Statics: Ramifications of the Crisis of 1903–04’, Synthese 83 No. 3 (next issue).
Pauli, W.: 1955, ‘The Influence of Archetypal Ideas on the Scientific Theories of Kepler’, in C. G. Jung, The Interpretation of Nature and the Psyche, R. F. C. Hull and P. Silz (trans.), Routledge & Kegan Paul, London; first published in 1952.
Sylla, E.: 1987, ‘The Oxford Calculators in Context’, Science in Context 1, 257–80.
Wallace, W. A.: 1981, Prelude to Galileo, Essays on Medieval and Sixteenth-Century Source of Galileo's Thought, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.
Westman, R. S.: 1984, ‘Nature, Art, and Psyche: Jung, Pauli, and the Kepler-Fludd Polemic’, in B. Vickers (ed.), Occult and Scientific Mentalities in the Renaissance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 177–230.
Westman, R. S.: 1987, ‘La préface de Copernic au pape: esthétique humaniste et réforme de l'église’, History and Technology 4, 365–84.
Westman, R. S.: 1990, ‘Proof, Poetics and Patronage: Copernicus's Preface to De Revolutionibus’, in D. C. Lindberg and R. S. Westman (eds.), Reappraisals of the Scientific Revolution, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 167–205.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Westman, R.S. The Duhemian historiographical project. Synthese 83, 261–272 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00413760
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00413760