Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Pragmatic engagements: Philipp Frank and James Bryant Conant on science, education, and democracy

  • Published:
Studies in East European Thought Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This essay examines the relationship between Philipp Frank and James Bryant Conant in light of two issues that engaged leading American intellectuals in the mid-twentieth century: the place of metaphysics in higher education and the responsibilities of intellectuals as educators to defend democracy against the rise of totalitarianism. It suggests that Frank’s relationship to pragmatism was nourished by his professional and intellectual relationships to Conant and that each of their contributions to our understanding of science is inseparable from their efforts to engage their fellow intellectuals as well as the public about these pressing issues of their day.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See e.g. Frank (1963), Uebel (2011), Wuest (2015), Nemeth (2003).

  2. Frank to E.C. Kemble, Feb. 9, 1939 and Feb. 25, 1939. Frank to Harlow Shapley, April 7, 1939, all in Harvard University Archives, Harlow Shapley Papers (HUA-HSP).

  3. The words Hutchins quoted appear in Notes et documents, Issues 22–25, Institut international Jacques Maritain, 1981.

  4. See “Notes,” The International Journal of Ethics 48, No. 1 (Oct, 1937): 141–42; (Gilbert 1997: 85).

  5. Frank to E.C. Kemble, March 17, 1939; see also Frank to Kemble, Feb. 25, 1939, HUA-HSP. The surviving copies of these letters do not include the year 1939 in their dates; but their context and proximity to other letters in Shapley’s papers indicate this year and I have dated them accordingly.

  6. Frank to P. W. Bridgman, March 24, 1939; Carnap to Bridgman, March 16, 1939, HUA-HSP.

  7. Shapley to Frank, April 3, 1939; April 10, 1939. Frank to Shapley, April 13, 1939, HUA-HSP. On Shapley’s active career, see his autobiography (Shapley 1969).

  8. Conant to John Boyer, Sept. 12, 1952, James B. Conant Personal Papers, Harvard University Archives.

  9. See Kallen (1946a, b, c, d), and Neurath (1946a, b).

  10. Gilbert (1997: 340) n. 53; Frank to Shapley, June 22, 1940, HUA-HSP.

  11. See, e.g., Bryson et al. (1950, 1964).

  12. For perspective on Frank’s (1950) I am indebted to Nemeth (2003) which nicely summarizes Frank’s engagement with democratic theory.

  13. “WW diary May 20, 1947,” Rockefeller Archive Center, Tarrytown, NY, Rockefeller Foundation papers 1.100, box 35, folder 281. WW is Warren Weaver, to whom Frank also reported “Mr. Conant’s continuing interest in their work” in the unity of science in November, 1949 (“WW diary Wednesday 23, 1949,” folder 282).

  14. Rudolf Carnap to Louis Finkelstein, March 24, 1942. Jewish Theological Seminary of America Archives, General Files, Box 4.

  15. Conant (1947: 31), 106. See also page 64. Conant made similar points earlier in Conant (1944: 406).

  16. See, e.g., Frank’s essay “Logic and Metaphysics in Modern Science,” (in Frank (1949: 286–303), Frank (1957a: 30, b). On Conant’s earlier adoption of “conceptual schemes” from his Harvard colleague L.J. Henderson, see Isaac (2012). For an example of a Harvard political historian adopting the phrase from Henderson, see Brinton (1965: 9).

  17. For a useful comparison of Kuhn’s Structure with Conant’s writings, see Wray (2016).

  18. The Google N-gram, which indexes and counts the appearance of words and phrases in published book (https://books.google.com/ngrams) shows vividly how “paradigms” overtook “conceptual schemes” and “Thomas Kuhn” overtook “James Bryant Conant” by 1970.

  19. Kuhn to Frank, n.d. (probably December 1952). Thomas S. Kuhn Papers, M.I.T. Libraries, Box 25, folder 53.

References

  • Adler, M. (1941). God and the professors. In Science, philosophy and religion: A symposium (pp. 120–138). New York: Conference on Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way of Life, Inc.

  • Adler, M. (1952). The great ideas: A syntopicon of great books of the western World. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinton, C. (1965). The anatomy of revolution. New York: Vintage Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, L., Finkelstein, L. & MacIver, R. M. (Eds.) (1950). Goals for American education; ninth symposium. Conference on science, philosophy and religion in their relation to the democratic way of life, 9th, Columbia University, 1948. New York: Harper.

  • Bryson, L., Finkelstein, L., MacIver, R. M. & McKeon, R. (Eds.) (1964). Symbols and values: An initial study; thirteenth symposium. Conference on science, philosophy and religion in their relation to the democratic way of life, 9th, Columbia University, New York: Cooper Square.

  • Carnap, R. (1963). Rudolf carnap: Intellectual biography. In P. A. Schilpp (Ed.), The philosophy of Rudolf Carnap (pp. 1–84). La Salle, IL: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conant, J. B. (1944). Science and the national welfare. The Journal of Higher Education, 15(8), 399–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conant, J. B. (1947). On understanding science. New York: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conant, J. B. (1951). Greetings to the National Conference of the Institute for the Unity of Science, Boston, Massachusetts—April, 1950. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 80(1), 9–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conant, J. B. (1957a). Introduction. In Harvard case studies in experimental science (pp. vii–xvi). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  • Conant, J. B. (1957b). Foreword. In Thomas Kuhn (ed.) The copernican revolution. (pp. xiii–xviii). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  • Dewey, J. (1938). Unity of science as a social problem. In Encyclopedia and unified science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Finkelstein, L. (1941). The aims of the conference. In Science, philosophy and religion: A symposium (pp. 11–19). New York: Conference on Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way of Life, Inc.

  • Frank, Ph. (1949). Modern science and its philosophy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, Ph. (1950). Relativity: A Richer truth. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, Ph. (1951). Introductory remarks. Contributions to the analysis and synthesis of knowledge. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 80(1), 5–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, Ph. (1957a). Philosophy of science: The link between science and philosophy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, Ph (Ed.). (1957b). The validation of scientific theories. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, Ph. (1963). The pragmatic components in Carnap’s ‘elimination of metaphysics’. In P. A. Schilpp (Ed.), The philosophy of Rudolf Carnap (pp. 159–164). La Salle, IL: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, Ph. (1941). Science and democracy. In Science, philosophy and religion: A symposium (pp. 215–228). New York: Conference on Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way of Life, Inc.

  • Gilbert, J. B. (1997). Redeeming culture: American religion in an age of science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harvard University. (1945). General education in a free society. New York: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter, R. (1963). Anti-intellectualism in American life. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hook, S. (1943). The new failure of nerve. Partisan Review, 10, 2–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hook, S. (1987). Out of step: An unquiet life in the 20th century. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, R. M. (1936). The higher learning in America. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, R. M. (Ed.). (1955). Great books of the Western World. Chicago, IL: Encyclopedia Britannica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, J. (2012). Working knowledge: Making the human sciences from Parsons to Kuhn. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kallen, H. (1940). The meanings of ‘Unity’ among the sciences. Educational Administration and Supervision, 26(2), 81–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallen, H. (1946a). The meaning of ‘Unity’ among the sciences, once more. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 6, 493–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kallen, H. (1946b). Reply. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 6, 515–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kallen, H. (1946c). An annotation to the annotation. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 6, 528–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kallen, H. (1946d). Postscript: Otto Neurath, 1882–1945. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 6, 529–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, Th. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, Ch. (1937). Logical positivism, pragmatism, and scientific empiricism. Actualités Scientifiques et Industrielles, 449, Paris: Hermann et Cie.

  • Nemeth, E. (2003). Philosophy of science and democracy: Some reflections on Philipp Frank’s relativity–A Richer Truth. In M. Heidelberger & F. Stadler (Eds.), Wissenschaftsphilosophie und Politik. Philosophy of science and politics (pp. 119–138). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neurath, O. (1928/1973). Personal life and class struggle. In Cohen, R. S. & M. Neurath (Eds.) Otto Neurath: Empiricism and sociology (pp. 249–298). Boston: Reidel.

  • Neurath, O. (1946a). Orchestration of the sciences by the encyclopedism of logical empiricism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 6, 496–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neurath, O. (1946b). For the discussion: Just annotations, not a reply. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 6, 526–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, Ch. (1997). Young Sidney Hook: Marxist and pragmatist. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reisch, G. (2005). How the Cold War transformed philosophy of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shapley, H. (1969). Through rugged ways to the stars. New York: Scribner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. P. (1961). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin, S. (1951). Review of Philipp Frank. Relativity—A Richer Truth. Philosophical Quarterly, 1(2), 180–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uebel, Th. (2011). Beyond the formalist criterion of cognitive significance: Philipp Frank’s later antimetaphysics. HOPOS, 1(1), 47–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wray, K. B. (2016). The influence of James B. Conant on Kuhn’s Structure of scientific revolutions. HOPOS, 6(1), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wuest, A. (2015). Philipp Frank: Philosophy of science, pragmatism, and social engagement. Ph.D Dissertation, University of Western Ontario.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chicago, IL, USA

    George Reisch

Authors
  1. George Reisch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to George Reisch.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Reisch, G. Pragmatic engagements: Philipp Frank and James Bryant Conant on science, education, and democracy. Stud East Eur Thought 69, 227–244 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11212-017-9289-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11212-017-9289-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation