Advertisement

Philosophical Studies

, Volume 143, Issue 1, pp 5–24 | Cite as

The perils of Perrin, in the hands of philosophers

  • Bas C. van FraassenEmail author
Article

Abstract

The story of how Perrin’s experimental work established the reality of atoms and molecules has been a staple in (realist) philosophy of science writings (Wesley Salmon, Clark Glymour, Peter Achinstein, Penelope Maddy, …). I’ll argue that how this story is told distorts both what the work was and its significance, and draw morals for the understanding of how theories can be or fail to be empirically grounded.

Keywords

Perrin Atoms Realism Empiricism 

Notes

Acknowledgements

My thanks to the commentary by Helen Longino and the discussion at the Oberlin symposium; research for this paper was supported by National Science Foundation Senior Scholar Award SES-0549002.

References

  1. Achinstein, P. (2001). The book of evidence. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Avogadro, A. (1811). Essai d’une manière de déterminer les masses relatives des molécules élémentaires des corps et les proportions selon lesquelles elles entrent dans ces combinaisons. Journal de Physique, 73, 58–76.Google Scholar
  3. Brush, S. G. (1976). The kind of motion we call heat. (in two volumes). Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  4. Clark, P. (1976). Atomism versus thermodynamics. In C. Howson (Ed.), Method and appraisal in the physical sciences (pp. 41–105). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. De Regt, H. W. (1996). Philosophy and the kinetic theory of gases. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 47, 31–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dulong, M., & Petit, A. T. (1819). Recherches sur quelques points importants de la théorie de la chaleur. Annales de chimie et physique, 10, 395–424.Google Scholar
  7. Duhem, P. (1996). Essays in the history and philosophy of science. (R. Ariew & P. Barker (Eds.), Trans.). Indianapolis: Hacket.Google Scholar
  8. Dumas, J.-B. (1839). Leçons sur la philosophie chimique. Facsimile edition, with introduction by Albert Bruylants. Brussels: Editions Culture et Civilisation, 1972.Google Scholar
  9. Gardner, M. R. (1979). Realism and Instrumentalism in 19th-Century Atomism. Philosophy of Science, 46, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Glymour, C. (1975). Relevant evidence. The Journal of Philosophy, 72, 403–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Glymour, C. (1980). Theory and evidence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Liston, M. (2007). Review of Maddy 2007. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2007-12-09. http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=11903.
  13. Mach, E. (1883). The Science of Mechanics: a Critical and Historical Account of Its Development; 6th English (ed.) (Reprinted 1960, LaSalle, IL: Open Court Pub. Co.).Google Scholar
  14. Maddy, P. (2000). Naturalism in mathematics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maddy, P. (2001). Naturalism: Friends and foes. Philosophical Perspectives, 15, 37–67.Google Scholar
  16. Maddy, P. (2007). Second philosophy: A naturalistic method. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Maxwell, C. (1875). On the dynamical evidence of the molecular constitution of bodies. Journal of the Chemical Society, 13, 493–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nyhof, J. (1988). Philosophical objections to the kinetic theory. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 39, 81–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Perrin, J. (1910). Brownian movement and molecular reality. (F. Soddy, Trans.). London: Taylor and Francis. (Reprinted Dover edition 2005).Google Scholar
  20. Perrin, J. (1913). Les Atomes. Paris : F. Alcan. (Atoms. by D. Li. Hammick, Trans., 1916). New York: D. Van Nostrand. (Reprinted Kessinger Publishing, 2007).Google Scholar
  21. Pierson, S. (1976). Review of Dumas 1839. Isis, 67, 134–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Poincaré, H. (1905). Science and hypothesis. London: Walter Scott Publishing.Google Scholar
  23. Salmon, W. (1984). Scientific explanation and the causal structure of the world. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  24. van Fraassen, B. C. (1983a). Glymour on Evidence and Explanation. In J. Earman (Ed.), Testing scientific theories. Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (Vol. X, pp. 165–176). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  25. van Fraassen, B. C. (1983b). Theory Comparison and Relevant Evidence. In J. Earman (Ed.), Testing scientific theories. Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (Vol. X, pp. 27–42). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  26. van Fraassen, B. C. (2008). Scientific representation: Paradoxes of perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Weyl, H. (1963). Philosophy of mathematics and natural science. NY: Atheneum.Google Scholar
  28. Wollaston, W. (1814). A synoptic scale of chemical equivalents. Royal Society of London, Philosophical Transactions, 104, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophySan Francisco State UniversitySan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations