Abstract
William Demopoulos identified a particular kind of “conceptual analysis” as a central achievement of the analytic tradition in philosophy, with far-reaching implications for the philosophy of mathematics and the mathematical sciences. I present an overview of this notion of conceptual analysis, the part that it has played in the construction and interpretation of physical theory, and its implications for some general questions about the relation between formal theories and experience.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
See also Chapter 7, this volume.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
See Bub (2005) and this volume, below, for a particularly illuminating discussion of Einstein’s distinction and its contemporary relevance.
- 5.
- 6.
For a detailed and illuminating treatment of this subject, here only sketched, see Frappier (2004).
- 7.
Flores (1999) clarifies many aspects of Einstein’s distinction by re-formulating it as the distinction between “framework” and “interaction” theories, a formulation that not only captures key aspects of relativity and quantum mechanics, but also their kinship with Newtonian mechanics as a theory of the same type.
- 8.
- 9.
- 10.
See Bub and Pitowsky (2010) for a useful discussion of this problem.
- 11.
- 12.
See Chapter 12 , this volume, and Demopoulos (2011a).
- 13.
See DiSalle (2002) for further discussion of the contrast between the view presented here and the views of the logical positivists.
- 14.
For further discussion and context, see also Demopoulos and Friedman (1985).
References
Bell, J.S. 1993. How to teach special relativity. In Speakable and unspeakable in quantum mechanics, ed. J.S. Bell, 67–80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, H. 2005. Physical relativity: Space-time structure from a dynamical perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brown, H., and C. Timpson. 2006. Why special relativity should not be a template for a fundamental reformulation of quantum mechanics. In Physical theory and its interpretation: Essays in honour of Jeffrey Bub, eds. W. Demopoulos and I. Pitowsky, 29–42. Western Ontario series in the philosophy of science. New York: Springer.
Bub, J. 2004. Why the quantum? Studies in the History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 35: 241–266.
Bub, J. 2005. Quantum mechanics is about quantum information. Foundations of Physics 34: 541–560.
Bub, J., and I. Pitowsky 2010. Two dogmas about quantum mechanics. In Many worlds? Everett, quantum theory, and reality, eds. S. Saunders, A. Kent, J. Barrett, and D. Wallace, 433–459. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Demopoulos, W. 1974. What is the logical interpretation of quantum mechanics? In PSA 1974: Proceedings of the biennial meeting of the philosophy of science association, 721–728. New York: Springer.
Demopoulos, W. 1998. The philosophical basis of our knowledge of number. Noûs 32: 481–503.
Demopoulos, W. 2000. On the origin and status of our conception of number. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 41: 210–226.
Demopoulos, W. 2003. On the rational reconstruction of our theoretical knowledge. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 54: 371–403.
Demopoulos, W. 2011a. Generalized probability measures and the framework of effects. The probable and the improbable: A memorial volume for Itamar Pitowsky, eds. Meir Hemmo and Yemima Ben-Menahem, Forthcoming. New York: Springer.
Demopoulos, W. 2011b. Notes on van Fraassen (unpublished manuscript).
Demopoulos, W., and Friedman, M. 1985. Bertrand Russell’s The Analysis of Matter: Its historical context and contemporary interest. Philosophy of Science 52: 621–639.
DiSalle, R. 2002. Conventionalism and modern physics: a re-assessment. Noûs 36: 169–200.
DiSalle, R. 2006. Understanding space-time: The philosophical development of physics from Newton to Einstein. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
DiSalle, R. 2010. Synthesis, the synthetic a priori, and the origins of modern space-time theory. In Discourse on a new method, eds. M. Dickson and M. Domski, 523–552. Chicago: Open Court Press.
Einstein, A. 1905. Zur elektrodynamik bewegter Körper. Annalen der Physik 17: 891–921.
Einstein, A. 1917. Über die spezielle und die allgemeine Relativitätstheorie (Gemeinverständlich), 2nd edn. Braunschweig: Vieweg und Sohn.
Einstein, A. 2002. Was ist Relativitäts-Theorie? In The collected papers of Albert Einstein, eds. M. Janssen, R. Shulmann, J. Illy, C. Lehner, and D. Buchwald, vol. 7, 206–211. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Einstein, A., H.A. Lorentz, H. Minkowski, and H. Weyl. 1952. The principle of relativity (trans: Perrett, W. and G.B. Jeffery). New York: Dover Books.
Flores, F. 1999. Einstein’s theory of theories and types of theoretical explanation. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13: 123–134.
Frappier, M. 2004. Heisenberg ’s notion of interpretation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Western Ontario.
Hagar, A. 2008. Length matters: The Einstein–Swann correspondence and the constructive approach to the special theory of relativity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 39: 532–556.
Heisenberg, W. 1927. Ueber den anschaulichen Inhalt der quantentheoretischen Kinematik and Mechanik. Zeitschrift für Physik 43: 172–198.
Helmholtz, H. 1870. Ueber den Ursprung und die Bedeutung der geometrischen Axiome. In Helmholtz’s Vorträge und Reden, vol. 2, 1–31. Braunschweig: Vieweg und Sohn, 1884.
Janssen, M. 2008. Drawing the line between kinematics and dynamics in special relativity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 40: 26–52.
Janssen, M., R. Shulmann, J. Illy, C. Lehner, and D. Buchwald, eds. 2002. The collected papers of Albert Einstein, vol. 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kuhn, T. 1970a. The structure of scientific revolutions, 2nd edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kuhn, T. 1970b. Logic of discovery or psychology of research? In Criticism and the growth of knowledge, eds. I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave, 1–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lorentz, H.A. 1952. Michelson’s interference experiment. In The principle of relativity, eds. A. Einstein, H.A. Lorentz, H. Minkowski, and H. Weyl, 3–7. New York: Dover Books.
Minkowski, H. 1908. Die Grundgleichungen für die elektromagnetischen Vorgänge in bewegten Körper. Mathematische Annalen 68: 472–525.
Minkowski, H. 1909. Raum und Zeit. Physikalische Zeitschrift 10: 104–111.
Norton, J. 2008. Why constructive relativity fails. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59: 821–834.
Pitowsky, I. 2006. Quantum Mechanics as a Theory of Probability. In Physical theory and its interpretation: Essays in honor of Jeffrey Bub, eds. W. Demopoulos and I. Pitowsky, 213–240. The Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science, vol. 72. New York: Springer.
Poincaré, H. 1902. La Science et L’Hypothèse. Paris: Flammarion.
Poincaré, H. 1905. Sur la dynamique de l’électron. Comptes Rendus de l’Acadèmie des Sciences 140: 1504–1508.
Reichenbach, H. 1949. The philosophical significance of relativity. In Albert Einstein, philosopher-scientist, ed. P.A. Schilpp, 289–311. Chicago: Open Court.
van Fraassen, B. 1980. The Scientific Image. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
van Fraassen, B. 2008. Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wright, C. 1997. On the philosophical significance of Frege’s Theorem. In Language, thought, and logic. Essays in honour of Michael Dummett, ed. R.G. Heck, 201–233. New York: Oxford University Press.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank my co-editors, Mélanie Frappier and Derek H. Brown, for their tireless work on this volume, taking on rather more than the lion’s share of the editorial tasks, and thereby making it possible for me to complete this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
DiSalle, R. (2012). Analysis and Interpretation in the Philosophy of Modern Physics. In: Frappier, M., Brown, D., DiSalle, R. (eds) Analysis and Interpretation in the Exact Sciences. The Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science, vol 78. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2582-9_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2582-9_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2581-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2582-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)