Skip to main content

Choice or No Choice? Affinity and Theory Choice

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Theory Choice in the History of Chemical Practices

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Molecular Science ((BRIESFHISTCHEM))

Abstract

Falling as it does between two scientific ‘revolutions’, much of 18th century chemistry is often seen as transitional, lacking an easy to grasp character of its own. Tales of Newtonian assimilation dominate studies of the first half of the century, while those of the latter half are concerned in the main with the great changes to come.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Affinity is notably absent from Hankins [6] for reasons which are far from clear.

  2. 2.

    The Royal Society holds some of their correspondence, as do the British Library as part of the Sloane Collection.

  3. 3.

    My researches into both the published and unpublished papers of the Royal Society have shown that although the Society did receive a letter from Geoffroy to Sloane in 1719 (Royal Society of London 1718–1721), no discussion of Geoffroy’s paper or comment was noted.

  4. 4.

    See e.g. December 21st 1721, Royal Society of London 1718–1721.

  5. 5.

    For a comprehensive discussion (and demolition) of these assumptions, see my Ph.D. dissertation [16].

  6. 6.

    See, for example, Cullen [22] in which Cullen asserts the role of Newton in the formulation of affinity.

  7. 7.

    For detail, see Taylor [26].

  8. 8.

    For a general survey of ‘itinerant’ lecturers, see Gibbs [27].

  9. 9.

    For example, see [2832].

  10. 10.

    Shaw’s unofficial translation of the lectures [36] provided equally copious notes including references to some of the Memoires, but the latest reference is 1716.

  11. 11.

    See John Powers’ recent work on Boerhaave’s chemistry in which he provides an explanation of Boerhaave’s apparent lack of interest in affinity [37].

  12. 12.

    When the work finally appeared, this was amended to read “an attempt to improve Arts, Trades and Manufactures” [40].

  13. 13.

    The discussion of affinity appears as part of Lewis’s explanation of the different types of “active powers” of bodies, chemical and mechanical [42].

  14. 14.

    The word ‘officinal’ is defined by the OED [44] as referring to a medicinal preparation. “kept as a stock preparation by apothecaries or pharmacists (now rare); made to a standard prescribed in a pharmacopoeia or formulary, included in a pharmacopoeia.” “officinal, a.”

  15. 15.

    Geoffroy’s table included a column headed with iron, with regulus of antimony immediately below it, and copper, silver and lead below that. The next column was headed by regulus of antimony, with iron immediately below it, and again copper, silver and lead below that. There is nothing inconsistent about this. Geoffroy was clearly showing that the strongest affinity lay between antimony and iron, and that this will lead to all other metals being removed from their union with either of these two metals. Indeed, there would have been something wrong with Geoffroy’s table if these two columns had not borne this relationship to each other.

  16. 16.

    Two Acts of 1727, the first for the better Regulation of the Linen and Hempen Manufactures in Scotland, and the second for Encouraging and promoting Fisheries and other Manufactures and Improvements in Scotland were crucial here. The latter Act resulted in the creation of the Board of Trustees for Manufactures, a body which paid both Cullen and Black premiums for investigations into bleaching. See [47].

  17. 17.

    For detail on Cullen’s use of affinity theory in his pedagogy, see Taylor [16, 26].

  18. 18.

    On Cullen’s diagrams, see [4]. On paper tools in chemistry, see [5860].

  19. 19.

    For a detailed account of Cullen’s speculative theory, see Taylor [16].

  20. 20.

    Black to Dr. James Ferguson, Glasgow 14 October 1763 [61].

  21. 21.

    On the crucial relation between training and scientific practice, see Galison and Assmus [66].

  22. 22.

    A recent work covering the ‘history of chemistry from alchemy to the atomic age’ was titled “Creations of Fire”, presumably in homage to the earliest methods of chemistry [68].

  23. 23.

    One of Black’s furnaces cost Joseph Priestley £3 13s 6d [72].

  24. 24.

    This particular instance of the generation of heat was a common interest for chemists of both the 17th and 18th centuries, discussed and explained in various ways by Boyle, Hales, Lemery, Boerhaave amongst others. See Dyck [76].

  25. 25.

    On the history of specific and latent heats, see Scott [78], Dyck [79], Fox [80], McKie and Heathcote [81].

  26. 26.

    It is possible, of course, that the real point of Geoffroy’s paper was not affinity at all. Some years earlier he had reported a series of experiments which he interpreted as showing that a sulphur principle combined with vitriolic acid to form common sulphur and with metallic calces to form the more familiar metals [90, 91]. Bearing in mind that the former combination is specifically included in his affinity table, perhaps the 1718 Mémoire was in fact a piece of subtle propaganda intended to reinforce his views? In a later paper that defended certain aspects of his table against criticism, he identified the sulphur principle with Stahl’s phlogiston [92]. Here he expressly focused on its combination with vitriolic acid as an instance of an affinity that was stronger than that of the acid for fixed alkali. His paper reinforced his interpretation of his 1704 experiments even as he was purportedly clarifying his rapports. These repeated references to his sulphur principle were embedded within papers that drew almost entirely on familiar, even unquestioned knowledge. Both papers thus implied that his new ideas were not only accepted, they were beyond question. This idea is, it must be admitted, purely speculative, although it usefully illustrates the point perhaps, that Geoffroy’s own intentions for his table were irrelevant to its subsequent history.

  27. 27.

    Possibly the largest affinity table ever produced at 62 columns in both the wet and dry ways.

  28. 28.

    Parkinson was scrupulous in presenting alternative views from the material view of heat as well. His personal preference can, however, be ascertained by the fact that the four pages devoted to the caloric theory was ‘balanced’ by an account of Rumford, Davy and Beddoes’s arguments in favour of vibratory heat occupying barely a single page.

  29. 29.

    Lavoisier [98], see Tables of Contents and throughout.

  30. 30.

    Briefly, the particles of caloric tended to separate particles of matter (molecules), while the force of attraction pulled them together. The states of matter and its behaviour were a consequence of the balance of these two forces. Thus, for Lavoisier the two “pillars” were presumably caloric and affinity: this would seem to cast some doubt on the true extent of Lavoisier’s ‘revolution’ [89].

References

  1. Thackray A (1970) Atoms and powers, harvard monographs in the history of science. Oxford University Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  2. Thackray A (1995) Quantified chemistry—the Newtonian dream. Osiris 2nd series, 10:92–108

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cohen IB (1964) Isaac Newton, Hans Sloane and the Académie Royale des Sciences. In: Melanges Alexandre Koyré - 1 L’Aventure de la Science, vol. 1, Histoire de la Pensee - Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, Sorbonne. Hermann, Paris, pp 61–116

    Google Scholar 

  4. Crosland M (1959) The use of diagrams as chemical ‘equations’ in the lecture notes of William Cullen and Joseph Black. Ann Sci 15:75–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Crosland M (1963) The development of chemistry in the eighteenth century. In: Transactions of the first international congress on the enlightenment, Besterman, Theodore. Studies on Voltaire and the Eighteenth Century, vol. 24. Institute de Musee Voltaire, Geneva, pp 369–441

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hankins TL (1985) Science and the enlightenment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Geoffroy EF (1719) Table des Differents Rapports observes en Chimie entre differentes substances. Mem Acad R Sci 1718:202–212

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fontenelle BB (1719) Sur les Rapports de Differentes substances de Chimie. Mem Acad R Sci 1718:35–37

    Google Scholar 

  9. Duncan AM (1981) Styles of language and orders of chemical thought. Ambix 28:83–107

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Duncan AM (1996) Laws and order in eighteenth-century chemistry, chapters 3 & 4. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  11. Académie Royale des Sciences (1962) Proces Verbaux, 1667–1793. Num. BNF de l’éd. de, Paris, T37, f 231v

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fontenelle BB (1722) Sur les Rapports Des Differents Substances en Chimie. Mem Acad R Sci 1720:32–35

    Google Scholar 

  13. Senac JB (1723) Nouveau Cours de Chymie Suivant les Principes de Newton & de Sthall. Paris, p lxvii

    Google Scholar 

  14. Duncan AM (1996) Laws and order in eighteenth-century chemistry. Clarendon Press, Oxford, p 114

    Google Scholar 

  15. Newton I (1979) Opticks or a treatise of the reflections, refractions, inflections & colours of light. Dover Publications, Inc., New York, pp 380–381 (reprint of 1730 edition)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Taylor GNL (2006) Variations on a theme: patterns of congruence and divergence among 18th century chemical affinity theories. Ph.D. thesis, University College London

    Google Scholar 

  17. Guerlac H (1968) The Background to Dalton’s Atomic Theory. In: Cardwell DS (ed.) John Dalton and the Progress of Science. Manchester University Press, Manchester, p 73

    Google Scholar 

  18. Boyle R (1744) Of the mechanical causes of chemical precipitation (1675). In: The works of the honorable Robert Boyle, 5 vols, vol 3. A. Millar, London, pp 635–642

    Google Scholar 

  19. Boyle R (1744) Of the mechanical causes of chemical precipitation (1675). In: The works of the honorable Robert Boyle, 5 vols. A. Millar, London, vol 3, p 640

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kragh H (1989) An introduction to historiography of science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 111

    Google Scholar 

  21. Warltire J (1769) Tables of the various combinations and specific attractions of the substances employed in chemistry. Being a compendium of that science: intended chiefly for the use of those gentlemen and ladies who attend the Author’s lectures. London, p 25

    Google Scholar 

  22. Cullen W (n.d. 1760s?) Notes taken from Chemistry Lectures. MSS 10, Cullen, Royal College of Physicians Edinburgh Library, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kim MG (2003) Affinity, that elusive dream: a genealogy of the chemical revolution. Transformations: studies in the history of science and technology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachussetts, pp 188–201

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kim MG (2003) Affinity, that elusive dream: a genealogy of the chemical revolution. Transformations: studies in the history of science and technology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachussetts, p 167

    Google Scholar 

  25. Geoffroy EF (1736) A treatise of the fossil, vegetable and animal substances that are made use of in physick (trans: Douglas G). London

    Google Scholar 

  26. Taylor G (2008) Marking out a disciplinary common ground: the role of chemical pedagogy in establishing the doctrine of affinity at the heart of British chemistry. Ann Sci 65:465–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gibbs FW (1960) Itinerant lecturers in natural philosophy. Ambix 8:111–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Saunders W (n.d. 1766?) A syllabus of lectures on chemistry

    Google Scholar 

  29. Martin B (1743) A course of lectures in natural and experimental philosophy, geography and astronomy. Newbery and Micklewright, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  30. Shaw P (n.d. 1733?) Chemical Lectures, Publickly read at London, in the years 1731, and 1732; and Since at Scarborough, in 1733 for the improvement of Arts, Trades and Natural Philosophy. London

    Google Scholar 

  31. Warltire J (1769) Analysis of a course of lectures in experimental philosophy; with a brief account of the most necessary instruments used in the course, and the gradual improvements of science: intended chiefly for the use of the Author’s audience, 6th Ed. London

    Google Scholar 

  32. Wilson J (1771) A course of chemistry divided into twenty-four lectures, formerly given by the late learned Doctor Henry Pemberton, Professor of Physic at Gresham College

    Google Scholar 

  33. Golinski J (1983) Peter Shaw: Chemistry and Communication in Augustan England. Ambix 30:19–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Shaw P, Hauksbee F (1731) An Essay for Introducing a Portable Laboratory: By means whereof all the Chemical Operations are Commodiously Perform’d for the Purposes of Philosophy, Medicine, Metallurgy, and a Family. J. Osborn and T. Longman, London, p 41

    Google Scholar 

  35. Shaw P (n.d. 1733?) Chemical Lectures, Publickly read at London, in the years 1731, and 1732; and Since at Scarborough, in 1733 for the Improvement of Arts, Trades and Natural Philosophy. London, pp 173–174

    Google Scholar 

  36. Boerhaave H (1727) A new method of chemistry. In: Shaw P, Chambers E. (eds) J. Osborn and T. Longman, London

    Google Scholar 

  37. Powers JC (2012) Inventing chemistry: Herman Boerhaave and the reform of the chemical arts. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Book  Google Scholar 

  38. Boerhaave H (1741) A new method of chemistry. In: Shaw P (ed), London, p 58

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lewis W (1748) Proposals for Printing, by Subscription Commercicum Philosophico-Technicum, frontispiece

    Google Scholar 

  40. Lewis W (1763) Commercicum Philosophico-Technicum or The Philosophical Commerce of Arts: designed as an attempt to improve Arts, Trades and Manufactures, 2 vols. London, frontispiece

    Google Scholar 

  41. Lewis W (1748) Proposals for Printing, by Subscription Commercicum Philosophico-Technicum, p 18

    Google Scholar 

  42. Lewis W (1763) Commercicum Philosophico-Technicum or The Philosophical Commerce of Arts: designed as an attempt to improve Arts, Trades and Manufactures, 2 vols. London, p iv

    Google Scholar 

  43. Lewis, W (1753) The New Dispensatory: Containing I. The Theory and Practice of Pharmacy. II. A Distribution of MEDICINAL SIMPLES, according to their virtues and sensible Qualities; the Description, Use, and Dose of each Article. III. A full translation of the LONDON and EDINBURGH PHARMACOPOEIAS, with the Use, Dose &c. of the several Medicines. IV. Directions for EXTEMPORANEOUS PRESCRIPTION; with a select number of elegant FORMS. V. A collection of CHEAP REMEDIES for the Use of the POOR. The Whole Interspersed With Practical Cautions and O Observations. Intended as a CORRECTION, and IMPROVEMENT of Quincy, 1st edn. J. Nourse, London, p 10

    Google Scholar 

  44. OED (2004) Oxford University Press. http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/00330510. Accessed 10 Oct 2006 (Online)

  45. Sivin N (1962) William Lewis (1708–1781) as a Chemist. Chymia 8:63–88

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Lewis W (1765) The new dispensatory, 2nd edn. London, p 35

    Google Scholar 

  47. Clow A, Clow N (1952) The chemical revolution. The Batchworth Press, London, pp 165–177

    Google Scholar 

  48. Bensaude-Vincent B (1986) Mendeleev’s periodic system of chemical elements. Br J Hist Sci 19:3–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Cullen W (1766) Notes taken by Charles Blagden from Chemistry Lectures, MS 1922, Blagden Papers, Wellcome Library for the History and Understanding of Medicine, London, Lecture 9

    Google Scholar 

  50. Cullen W (1766) Notes taken by Charles Blagden from Chemistry Lectures, MS 1922, Blagden Papers, Wellcome Library for the History and Understanding of Medicine, London, Lecture 19

    Google Scholar 

  51. Cullen W (n.d. 1760s?) Notes taken from Chemistry Lectures. MSS 10, Cullen, Royal College of Physicians Edinburgh Library, Edinburgh., f 66

    Google Scholar 

  52. Duncan AM (1996) Laws and order in eighteenth-century chemistry. Clarendon Press, Oxford, p 115

    Google Scholar 

  53. Cullen W (1766) Notes taken by Charles Blagden from Chemistry Lectures, MS 1922, Blagden Papers, Wellcome Library for the History and Understanding of Medicine, London, Lecture 10

    Google Scholar 

  54. Macquer P-J (1749) Elemens de Chymie—Theorique. Chés Jean-Thomas Herissant, Paris, p 256

    Google Scholar 

  55. Macquer P-J (1749) Elemens de Chymie—Theorique. Chés Jean-Thomas Herissant, Paris, p 22

    Google Scholar 

  56. Kim MG (2003) Affinity, That elusive dream: a genealogy of the chemical revolution. Transformations: studies in the history of science and technology, chapter 4. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachussetts

    Google Scholar 

  57. Kim MG (2003) Affinity, that elusive dream: a genealogy of the chemical revolution. Transformations: studies in the history of science and technology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachussetts, p 161

    Google Scholar 

  58. Klein U (2001) Tools and modes of representation in the laboratory sciences. U. Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  59. Klein U (2001) Berzelian formulas as paper tools in early nineteenth century chemistry. Found Chem 3:7–32

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Klein U (2001) The creative power of paper tools in early nineteenth-century chemistry. In: Klein U (ed) Tools and modes of representation in the laboratory sciences. Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 13–34

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  61. Anderson RGW, Jones J (2012) The correspondence of Joseph Black, 2 vols. Ashgate, Farnham

    Google Scholar 

  62. Thomson T (1830) The history of chemistry, 2 vols. Henry Colburn and Richard Bentley, London, p 157

    Google Scholar 

  63. Duncan AM (1996) Laws and order in eighteenth-century chemistry. Clarendon Press, Oxford, p 116

    Google Scholar 

  64. Klein U (1996) The chemical workshop tradition and the experimental practice: discontinuities within continuities. Sci Context 9(3):251–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Klein U (1995) E F Geoffroy’s table of different rapports observed between different chemical substances—a reinterpretation. Ambix 42:79–100

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Galison P, Assmus A (1989) Artificial clouds, real particles. In: Gooding D, Pinch TJ, Schaffer S (eds) The uses of experiment: studies in the natural sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 225–274

    Google Scholar 

  67. Read J (1995) From alchemy to chemistry. Dover Publications Inc, New York, p 79

    Google Scholar 

  68. Cobb C, Goldwhite H (2001) Creations of fire: chemistry’s lively history from alchemy to the atomic age. Perseus Publishing, Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  69. Lewis W (1753) The New Dispensatory: Containing I. The Theory and Practice of Pharmacy. II. A Distribution of MEDICINAL SIMPLES, according to their virtues and sensible Qualities; the Description, Use, and Dose of each Article. III. A full translation of the LONDON and EDINBURGH PHARMACOPOEIAS, with the Use, Dose &c. of the several Medicines. IV. Directions for EXTEMPORANEOUS PRESCRIPTION; with a select number of elegant FORMS. V. A collection of CHEAP REMEDIES for the Use of the POOR. The Whole Interspersed With Practical Cautions and O Observations. Intended as a CORRECTION, and IMPROVEMENT of Quincy, 1st edn. J. Nourse, London, p 7

    Google Scholar 

  70. Lewis W (1753) The New Dispensatory: Containing I. The Theory and Practice of Pharmacy. II. A Distribution of MEDICINAL SIMPLES, according to their virtues and sensible Qualities; the Description, Use, and Dose of each Article. III. A full translation of the LONDON and EDINBURGH PHARMACOPOEIAS, with the Use, Dose &c. of the several Medicines. IV. Directions for EXTEMPORANEOUS PRESCRIPTION; with a select number of elegant FORMS. V. A collection of CHEAP REMEDIES for the Use of the POOR. The Whole Interspersed With Practical Cautions and O Observations. Intended as a CORRECTION, and IMPROVEMENT of Quincy, 1st edn. J. Nourse, London, p 12

    Google Scholar 

  71. Cullen W (1766) Notes taken by Charles Blagden from Chemistry Lectures, MS 1922, Blagden Papers, Wellcome Library for the History and Understanding of Medicine, London, Lectures 40–43

    Google Scholar 

  72. Anderson R (2005) Joseph Priestley: public intellectual. Chem Herit Mag 23(1):6–9, 36–38

    Google Scholar 

  73. Bergman T (1970) A Dissertation on elective attractions, 2nd English edn (trans: Beddoes T) Frank Cass & Co. Ltd., London (reprint of 1785 edition)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Nicholson W (1785) A dictionary of chemistry. G. G. and J. Robinson, London, p 158

    Google Scholar 

  75. Nicholson W (1792) The first principles of chemistry, 2nd edn. G. G. and J. Robinson, London, p 75

    Google Scholar 

  76. Dyck DR (1967) The Nature of heat and its relationship to chemistry in the eighteenth century, chapters II and IV. Ph.D. thesis, University of Wisconsin

    Google Scholar 

  77. Newton I (1979) Opticks or a treatise of the reflections, refractions, inflections and colours of light. Dover Publications, Inc., New York, pp 377–378 (reprint of 1730 edn)

    Google Scholar 

  78. Scott EL (1981) Richard Kirwan, J H de Magellan, and the early history of specific heat. Ann Sci 38:141–153

    Google Scholar 

  79. Dyck DR (1967) The nature of heat and its relationship to chemistry in the eighteenth century. Ph.D. thesis, University of Wisconsin

    Google Scholar 

  80. Fox R (1971) The caloric theory of gases from Lavoisier to Regnault. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  81. McKie D, Heathcote NHV (1935) The discovery of specific and latent heats. Edward Arnold, London

    Google Scholar 

  82. Fox R (1971) The caloric theory of gases from Lavoisier to Regnault. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 19–20

    Google Scholar 

  83. McKie D, Heathcote NHV (1935) The discovery of specific and latent heats. Edward Arnold, London, p 137

    Google Scholar 

  84. Kirwan R (1781) Experiments and observations on the specific gravities and attractive powers of various saline substances. Phil Trans R Soc Lond 71:7–41

    Google Scholar 

  85. Kirwan R (1782) Continuation of the experiments and observations on the specific gravities and attractive powers of various saline substances. Phil Trans R Soc Lond 72:179–xxxv

    Google Scholar 

  86. Kirwan R (1783) Conclusion of the experiments and observations concerning the attractive powers of the mineral acids. Phil Trans R Soc Lond 73:15–84

    Google Scholar 

  87. Young T (1809) A numerical table of elective attractions; with remarks on the sequences of double decompositions. Phil Trans R Soc Lond 99:148–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Beretta M (2001) Lavoisier and his last printed work: the Mémoires de Physique et de Chimie (1805). Ann Sci 58:327–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Lavoisier AL (2004) Mémoires de Physique et de Chimie, 2 vols. Thoemmes Continuum, Bristol, vol I, pp 1–28 (reprint of 1805 edition)

    Google Scholar 

  90. Geoffroy EF (1704) Maniére de Recomposer le Souffre Commun par la Réünion de ses Principes, et d’en composer de Nouveau par le Mélange de Semblables Substances, avec quelques conjectures sur la composition des Métaux. Mem Acad R Sci 278–286

    Google Scholar 

  91. Geoffroy EF (1709) Expériences sur les Métaux, faites avec le Verre ardent du Palais Royal. Mem Acad R Sci 162–176

    Google Scholar 

  92. Geoffroy EF (1720) Enclairissements Sur la Table inferée dans les Mémoires de 1718 concernant les Rapports observés entre differentes Substances. Mem Acad R Sci 20–34

    Google Scholar 

  93. Bergman T (1970) A Dissertation on Elective Attractions, 2nd English edn. (trans: Beddoes T) Frank Cass & Co. Ltd., London, pp. 240–248 (reprint of 1785 edition)

    Google Scholar 

  94. Bergman T (1970) A Dissertation on Elective Attractions, 2nd English edn. (trans: Beddoes T) Frank Cass & Co. Ltd., London, pp 237–139 (reprint of 1785 edition)

    Google Scholar 

  95. Anon [Pearson G] (1799) A Translation of the Table of Chemical Nomenclature Proposed by De Guyton, Formerly De Morveau, Lavoisier, Bertholet, and De Fourcroy with Explanations, Additions, and Alterations to which are subjoined Tables of Single Elective Attraction, Tablers of Chemical Symbols, Tables of the Precise Forces of Chemical Attractions’ and Schemes and Explanations of Cases of Single and Double Elective Attractions, 2nd edn. J Johnson, London, Table III

    Google Scholar 

  96. Nisbet W (1805) A general dictionary of chemistry, containing the leading principles of the science in regard to facts, experiments and nomenclature, for the use of students

    Google Scholar 

  97. Parkinson J (1800) A chemical pocketbook. London, p 6

    Google Scholar 

  98. Lavoisier A (1789) Traité Élémentaire de Chimie. Paris

    Google Scholar 

  99. Kirwan R (1968) An Essay on Phlogiston and the Constitution of Acids. Frank Cass & Co Limited, London (reprint of 1789 edition)

    Google Scholar 

  100. Kuhn T (1996) The structure of scientific revolutions, 3rd edn. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Book  Google Scholar 

  101. Flynn S (2012) The science magpie. Icon Books, London, p 77

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Georgette Taylor .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Taylor, G. (2016). Choice or No Choice? Affinity and Theory Choice. In: Tobin, E., Ambrosio, C. (eds) Theory Choice in the History of Chemical Practices. SpringerBriefs in Molecular Science(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29893-1_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics