Science & Education

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 589–607 | Cite as

Observation, Inference, and Imagination: Elements of Edgar Allan Poe’s Philosophy of Science



Edgar Allan Poe’s standing as a literary figure, who drew on (and sometimes dabbled in) the scientific debates of his time, makes him an intriguing character for any exploration of the historical interrelationship between science, literature and philosophy. His sprawling ‘prose-poem’ Eureka (1848), in particular, has sometimes been scrutinized for anticipations of later scientific developments. By contrast, the present paper argues that it should be understood as a contribution to the raging debates about scientific methodology at the time. This methodological interest, which is echoed in Poe’s ‘tales of ratiocination’, gives rise to a proposed new mode of—broadly abductive—inference, which Poe attributes to the hybrid figure of the ‘poet-mathematician’. Without creative imagination and intuition, Science would necessarily remain incomplete, evenby its own standards. This concern with imaginative (abductive) inference ties in nicely with his coherentism, which grants pride of place to the twin virtues of Simplicity and Consistency, which must constrain imagination lest it degenerate into mere fancy.


  1. Ackroyd, P. (2008). Poe: A life cut short. London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
  2. Beaver, H. (1976). Commentary. In H. Beaver (Ed.), The science fiction of Edgar Allan Poe (pp. 333–426). London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  3. Brent, J. (1998). Charles Sanders Peirce: A life. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Carlson, E. W. (1973). Poe on the soul of man. Text of a lecture delivered at the fiftieth annual commemorative program of the Poe Society, October 8, 1972. Baltimore: The Edgar Allan Poe Society of Baltimore.Google Scholar
  5. Chandler, R. (1944, December). The simple art of murder. The Atlantic Monthly, 57–63.Google Scholar
  6. Deely, J. (2003). The word ‘semiotics’: Formation and origins. Semiotica, 146(1/4), 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Feidelson, C. (1953). Symbolism and American literature. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  8. Frank, L. (2003). Victorian detective fiction and the nature of evidence: The scientific investigations of Poe, Dickens and Doyle. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gelfert, H.-D. (2008). Edgar Allan Poe: Am Rande des Malstroms. Munich: C. H. Beck.Google Scholar
  10. Grimstad, P. (2005). C. Auguste Dupin and Charles S. Peirce: An abductive affinity. Edgar Allan Poe Review, 5(2), 22–30.Google Scholar
  11. Harrowitz, N. (1988). The body of the detective model: Charles S. Peirce and Edgar Allan Poe. In U. Eco & T. Sebeok (Eds.), The sign of three: Dupin, Holmes, Peirce (pp. 179–197). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Herschel, J. F. W. (1830). Preliminary discourse on the study of natural philosophy. London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown & Green and John Taylor.Google Scholar
  13. Hoagland, C. (1939). The universe of Eureka: A comparison of the theories of Eddington and Poe. Southern Literary Messenger, 1, 307–313.Google Scholar
  14. Hovey, K. A. (1995). Poe’s materialist metaphysics of man. In E. W. Carlson (Ed.), A companion to Poe studies (pp. 347–366). Westport: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  15. Kearns, C. (2002). Rehearsing Dupin: Poe’s duplicitous confrontation with Coleridge. Edgar Allan Poe Review, 3(1), 3–17.Google Scholar
  16. Levine, S., & Levine, S. F. (2004). Introduction. In S. Levine & S. F. Levine (Eds.), Eureka (pp. i–xxvii). Illinois: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  17. Link, F. H. (1968). Edgar Allan Poe: Ein Dichter zwischen Romantik und Moderne. Frankfurt: Athenäum.Google Scholar
  18. Lipton, P. (2004). Inference to the best explanation (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Manning, S. (1989). ‘The plots of God are perfect’: Poe’s Eureka and American creative nihilism. Journal of American Studies, 23(2), 235–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Martin, T. J. (1989). Detection, imagination, and the introduction to ‘The Murders in the Rue Morgue’. Modern Language Studies, 19(4), 31–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Meyers, J. (2000). Edgar Allan Poe: His life and legacy. New York: Cooper Square Press.Google Scholar
  22. Nichol, J. P. (1839). Views of the architecture of the heavens (3rd ed.). Edinburgh: William Tait.Google Scholar
  23. Niiniluoto, I. (1999). Abduction and geometrical analysis: Notes on Charles S. Peirce and Edgar Allan Poe. In L. Magnani, N. Nersessian, & P. Thagard (Eds.), Model-based reasoning in scientific discovery (pp. 239–254). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Norstedt, G. (1930). Poe and Einstein. Open Court, 44, 173–180.Google Scholar
  25. Paley, W. (1809). Natural theology: Or, evidences of the existence and attributes of the deity (12th ed.). London: J. Faulder.Google Scholar
  26. Passage, C. E. (1954). Dostoevski the adapter. A study of Dostoevski’s use of the tales of Hoffmann. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  27. Peeples, S. (2002). Poe’s ‘constructiveness’ and ‘The Fall of the House of Usher’. In K. J. Hayes (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Edgar Allan Poe (pp. 178–190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Peirce, C. S. (1958). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (=CP) (Vols. 1–6, 1931–1935, Ed. C. Hartshorne and P. Weiss); (Vols. 7–8, 1958, Ed. A. W. Burks). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Poe, E. A. (1850–1856). The works of the late Edgar Allan Poe (4 vols, Ed. by R. W. Griswold). New York: J.S. Redfield.Google Scholar
  30. Poe, E. A. (1883). The works of Edgar Allan Poe. Vol. III: Poems and essays (including Eureka, Marginalia, etc.etc.). Ed. by J. H. Ingram. Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black.Google Scholar
  31. Poe, E. A. (1966). The letters of Edgar Allan Poe. Vol. I. Ed. by J. W. Ostrom. New York: Gordian Press.Google Scholar
  32. Poe, E. A. (2004). Eureka. Edited with an introduction, notes, and textual variants by S. Levine & S. F. Levine. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  33. Reichertz, J. (1990). Folgern Sherlock Holmes oder Mr. Dupin abduktiv? Zur Fehlbestimmung der Abduktion in der semiotischen Analyse der Kriminalpoesie. Kodikas-Code/Ars Semeiotica: International Journal of Semantics, 13(3/4), 307–324.Google Scholar
  34. Schlutz, A. (2008). Purloined voices: Edgar Allan Poe reading Samuel Taylor Coleridge. Studies in Romanticism, 47(2), 195–224.Google Scholar
  35. Schumann, K. (1958). Die erzählende Prosa Edgar Allan Poes. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
  36. Stovall, F. (1930). Poe’s debt to Coleridge. University of Texas Studies in English, 10, 70–127.Google Scholar
  37. Taylor, M. A. (2007). Edgar Allan Poe’s (meta)physics: A pre-history of the post-human. Nineteenth-Century Literature, 62(2), 193–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tresch, J. (2002). Extra! Extra! Poe invents science fiction! In K. J. Hayes (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Edgar Allan Poe (pp. 113–132). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. van Calmthout, M. (1995, October 7). Twee boogseconden verschil tussen Newton en Poe (Summary of an interview with René van Slooten). De Volkskrant, 1.Google Scholar
  40. Wagenknecht, E. (1963). Edgar Allan Poe: The man behind the legend. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Weissberg, L. (1991). Edgar Allan Poe. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler.Google Scholar
  42. Welsh, S. (1991). The value of analogical evidence: Poe’s Eureka in the context of a scientific debate. Modern Language Studies, 21(4), 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Whewell, W. (1833). Astronomy and general physics considered with reference to natural theology. London: William Pickering.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Arts and Social SciencesNational University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations