Advertisement

Kant—Naturphilosophie—Electromagnetism

  • Michael Friedman
Part of the Boston Studies In The Philosophy Of Science book series (BSPS, volume 241)

Robert Stauffer first gave prominence to the circumstance that Ørsted’s discovery of electromagnetism was intimately connected, at least in Ørsted’s own mind, with his rather deep philosophical engagement with both Kant’s philosophy of science, as presented in the Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science of 1786, and the further development of this philosophy within post-Kantian German Naturphilosophie, especially as represented by Schelling. Building on Stauffer’s contribution, L. Pearce Williams developed a more general picture of the development of electromagnetic theory—especially in the work of Faraday but also placing particular emphasis on Ørsted—as resting on a profound deviation from the Newtonian tradition due to Naturphilosophie and ultimately to Kant.

Keywords

Pure Reason Regulative Principle Constitutive Principle Chemical Force Empirical Concept 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beiser, Frederick (2002). German Idealism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Caneva, Kenneth (1997). “Physics and Naturphilosophie: A Reconnaissance”. History of Science 35: 35–106.Google Scholar
  3. Cassirer, Ernst (1920). Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit. Dritter Band: Die Nachkantischen Systeme. Berlin: Bruno Cassirer.Google Scholar
  4. Cassirer, Ernst (1950). The Problem of Knowledge: Philosophy, Science, and History since Hegel. Translated by W. Woglom and C. Hendel. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cat, Jordi (2001). “On Understanding: Maxwell on the Methods of Illustration and Scientific Metaphor”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 32: 395–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Christensen, Dan (1995). “The Ørsted-Ritter Partnership and the Birth of Romantic Natural Philosophy”. Annals of Science 52: 153–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Förster, Eckart (2000). Kant’s Final Synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Franks, Paul (forthcoming). “What should Kantians learn from Maimon’s Skepticism?” In G. Freudenthal, ed. The Philosophy of Salomon Maimon and its Place in the Enlightenment. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  9. Friedman, Michael (1992). Kant and the Exact Sciences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Friedman, Michael (2001). Dynamics of Reason. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  11. Gower, Barry (1973). “Speculation in Physics: The History and Practice of Naturphilosophie”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 3: 301–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jelved, Karen, Andrew Jackson, and Ole Knuden, eds. (1998). Selected Scientific Works of Hans Christian Ørsted. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Kant, Immanuel (2002). Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science. Translated by M. Friedman. In H. Allison and P. Heath, eds. Immanuel Kant: Theoretical Philosophy after 1781. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Kuhn, Thomas (1959). “Energy Conservation as an Example of Simultaneous Discovery”. In M. Clagett, ed. Critical Problems in the History of Science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  15. Newton, Isaac (1931). Opticks. London: G. Bell and Sons.Google Scholar
  16. Ørsted, Hans Christian (1920). Naturvidenskabelige Skrifter (Scientific Papers). 3 vols. Copenhagen: Royal Danish Society of Sciences.Google Scholar
  17. Royce, Josiah (1919). Lectures on Modern Idealism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm (1848). Friedrich Wilhelm Josef von Schellings Sämmtliche Werke. Zweiter Band. Stuttgart und Augsberg: J. G. Cotta’scher Verlag.Google Scholar
  19. Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm (1988). Ideas for a Philosophy of Nature. Translated by E. Harris and P. Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Shanahan, Timothy (1989). “Kant, Naturphilosophie, and Ørsted’s Discovery of Electromagnetism: A Reassessment”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 20: 287–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Stauffer, Robert (1957). “Speculation and Experiment in the Background of Ørsted’s Discovery of Electromagnetism”. Isis 48: 33–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Williams, L. Pearce (1965). Michael Faraday: A Biography. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  23. Williams, L. Pearce (1966). The Origins of Field Theory. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  24. Williams, L. Pearce (1973). “Kant, Naturphilosophie and Scientific Method”. In R. Giere and R. Westfall, eds. Foundations of Scientific Method in the Nineteenth Century. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Friedman
    • 1
  1. 1.Stanford UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations