Coordination and Measurement: What We Get Wrong About What Reichenbach Got Right

Conference paper
Part of the European Studies in Philosophy of Science book series (ESPS, volume 5)


In his Scientific Representation (2008), van Fraassen argues that measuring is a form of representation. In fact, every measurement pinpoints its target in accordance with specific operational rules within an already-constructed theoretical space, in which certain conceptual interconnections can be represented. Reichenbach’s 1920 account of coordination is particularly interesting in this connection. Even though recent reassessments of this account do not do full justice to some important elements lying behind it, they do have the merit of focusing on a different aspect of his early work that traditional interpretations of relativized a priori principles have unfortunately neglected in favour of a more “structural” role for coordination. In Reichenbach’s early work, however, the idea of coordination was employed not only to indicate theory-specific fundamental principles such as the ones suggested in the literature on conventional principles in science, but also to refer to more “basic” assumptions. In Reichenbach, these principles are preconditions both of the individuation of physical magnitudes and of their measurement, and, as such, they are necessary to approach the world in the first instance. This paper aims to reassess Reichenbach’s approach to coordination and to the representation of physical quantities in light of recent literature on measurement and scientific representation.


Measurement Coordination Constitutive principles in science Reichenbach van Fraassen 



Besides the EPSA 2015 meeting in Düsseldorf, early versions of this paper were also presented at the BSPS conference in Manchester (2015) and at the GWP conference in Düsseldorf (2016). On all those occasions, I have greatly benefitted from the remarks made by the audience. I also wish to thank Giovanni Valente and Erik Curiel as well as two anonymous referees for valuable comments on a previous draft of this paper.


  1. Belot, G. 2010. Transcendental idealism among the Jersey metaphysicians. Philosophical Studies 150: 429–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chang, H. 2004. Inventing temperature. Measurement and scientific progress. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Friedman, M. 2001. Dynamics of reason. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  4. ———. 2012. Reconsidering the dynamics of reason. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 43: 47–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Krantz, H., R. Luce, P. Suppes, and A. Tversky. 1971–1990. Foundations of measurement, vol. I–III. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  6. Padovani, F. 2011. Relativizing the relativized a priori. Synthese 181 (1): 41–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. ———. 2013. Genidentity and topology of time: Kurt Lewin and Hans Reichenbach. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 273: 97–122.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 2015a. Measurement, coordination, and the relativized a priori. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 52: 123–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. ———. 2015b. Reichenbach on causality in 1923: Scientific inference, coordination, and confirmation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 53: 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Parrini, P. 2002. L’empirismo logico. Aspetti storici e prospettive teoriche. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
  11. Reichenbach, H. 1916/2008. The concept of probability in the mathematical representation of reality, ed. F. Eberhardt and C. Glymour. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. ———. 1920/1965. The theory of relativity and a priori knowledge. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  13. ———. 1923/1932. Die Kausalbehauptung und die Möglichkeit ihrer empirischen Nachprüfung. Erkenntnis 3 (1): 32–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Stump, D. 2015. Conceptual change and the philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Tal, E. 2013. Old and new problems in philosophy of measurement. Philosophy Compass 8 (12): 1159–1173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ———. 2016. Making time: A study in the epistemology of measurement. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 67: 297–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. van Fraassen, B.C. (2007). Relativity reign O’er Me. Symposium on Thomas Ryckman’s The Reign of Relativity. Metascience 16(3): 407–419.Google Scholar
  18. ———. 2008. Scientific representation. Paradoxes of perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. ———. 2012. Modeling and measurement: The criterion of empirical grounding. Philosophy of Science 79: 773–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Drexel UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations