Dix penseurs, parmi lesquels Boutroux, Poincare, Duhem et Brunschvicg, tentent de nouer un dialogue entre philosophie et science. Les multiples decouvertes, des geometries non euclidiennes aux atomes, ont bouleverse les conceptions traditionnelles. Ils passent au crible la demarche scientifique et debattent de la valeur des theories. Se cristallise alors un nouveau discours qu'on appellera desormais epistemologie. Il ne s'agit ni d'un positivisme rigoureux ni d'un scientisme reducteur: l'epistemologie francaise qui s'inscrit au tournant des XIXe et XXe siecles ne rejette pas (...) la metaphysique. Au contraire, elle accorde a la philosophie toute sa dimension sans renier la science. Apres un siecle de tentatives de depassement, d'elimination de la pensee speculative, successivement dementies, ces grands textes nous rappellent qu'une autre voie est possible: saisir l'unite des choses et leur signification pour l'homme. (shrink)

The following is an essay review of Paul Needham's translation of Pierre Duhem's Lemixte et la combinaison chimique and a numberof other essays. In this review we describe theintent and general features of Le mixte and try to place it in the larger context of Duhem'sprogram for energetics. The long essay (Essay3) opposing Marcellin Berthelot'sthermochemistry is singled out for detailedcommentary, since it gives Duhem's reasons forendorsing Josiah Willard Gibbs's chemicalstatics. We argue that a chemical mechanics ofa Gibbsian sort, defended in (...) Le mixte and otheressays in this volume, was the inspiration for,and basis of, Duhem's energetics. Needham'swelcome translations help an English-languageaudience to better understand the basiccontours of Duhem's important, if ultimatelymisguided, project. We conclude with somecomments on the difficulties in translatingDuhem and on the quality of the translationsNeedham has provided. (shrink)

Quelle conception de la science proposer aujourd'hui? Les grandes doctrines du XXe siècle se sont heurtées successivement à des difficultés, que ce soit le positivisme du Cercle de Vienne ou le rationalisme critique de Popper. Même la perspective historique inspirée par Bachelard et par Kuhn a donné lieu à des versions disparates. Pourtant, toutes ces tentatives partent d'un même constat : l'échec de la vision classique de la science et la nécessité d'un nouveau discours. On peut en retracer l'histoire. Face (...) à la pluralité des hypothèses possibles au sujet de l'espace, du temps et de la matière, Poincaré pose l'existence de conventions, ou mieux de libres décisions, au cœur de la science. Ainsi, dès la fin du XIXe siècle, il coupe court aux projets traditionnels de fondation : ni le synthétique a priori de Kant, ni les faits généraux de Comte ne sauraient expliquer la nature de l'activité scientifique. C'est la naissance d'un mouvement d'idées, le conventionnalisme, quia eu un impact décisif sur la philosophie viennoise et, à travers elle, sur la philosophie mondiale. Voilà un fil conducteur pour évaluer un siècle de débats. Que signifie donc libre décision en matière scientifique? On affirme la dimension historique irréductible de notre savoir ; on reconnaît la créativité et la responsabilité inhérentes à la science en tant qu'aventure humaine. (shrink)

One of the difficulties facing the philosopher of science today is the divide between historical epistemology and analytic philosophy of science. For over half a century these two traditions have followed independent and divergent paths. Historical epistemology, which originated in France in the early twentieth century, has recently been reformulated by a number of scholars such as Lorraine Daston, Ian Hacking, and Hans-Jörg Rheinberger. Elaborating novel historical methods, they seek to provide answers to major questions in the field. In the (...) light of this situation, my article examines the cultural barrier that explains the uneasy relationship between the two traditions. This barrier hinges on a number of factors—institutional, political and social—that are bound up with the philosophical issues in question. By resorting both to historical study and logical analysis, the new historical epistemology incites us to move beyond a rather sterile antagonism. (shrink)

New perspectives on Pierre Duhem’s The aim and structure of physical theory Content Type Journal Article DOI 10.1007/s11016-010-9467-3 Authors Anastasios Brenner, Department of Philosophy, Paul Valéry University-Montpellier III, Route De Mende, 34199 Montpellier cedex 5, France Paul Needham, Department of Philosophy, University of Stockholm, 10691 Stockholm, Sweden David J. Stump, Department of Philosophy, University of San Francisco, 2130 Fulton Street, San Francisco, CA 94117, USA Robert Deltete, Department of Philosophy, Seattle University, 901 12th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98122-1090, USA (...) Journal Metascience Online ISSN 1467-9981 Print ISSN 0815-0796 Journal Volume Volume 20 Journal Issue Volume 20, Number 1. (shrink)

On associe généralement l’expression de philosophie scientifique au positivisme logique, lequel se signale par son recours à la logique mathématique dans l’analyse des problèmes philosophiques. Or il apparaît à plus proche examen que cette expression est employée dès 1848 par Ernest Renan. La tentative d’élaborer une philosophie scientifique fait l’objet d’un long débat. Au tournant du xxe siècle, Abel Rey reprend cette question. Or, son livre, La Théorie de la physique chez les physiciens contemporains, exercera une influence forte sur le (...) Cercle de Vienne. Le positivisme absolu que propose Rey présente à la fois des analogies frappantes et des différences notables avec le positivisme logique. Si on y trouve le même souci de clarté et de précision, la logique n’est pas au centre de la démarche philosophique. Les diverses sciences, des mathématiques à la psychologie, sont mises à contribution. Il n’y a pas de hiérarchie, mais un encyclopédisme visant à inclure toutes les données fournies par la recherche scientifique. À travers l’étude comparée de la conception d’Abel Rey et de celle du Cercle de Vienne, il s’agit ici d’interroger la possibilité d’une philosophie scientifique. (shrink)

In 1903 Mach and Duhem, discovering one another’s writings, acknowledged the proximity of the philosophical views that they had been elaborating independently. A correspondence followed, which lasted several years. And in their ensuing publications both of these philosopher-scientists were careful to discuss their interlocutor’s claims. We have here ample matter for consideration. Mach and Duhem were to have an impact on the development of the Vienna Circle. Yet their conceptions are indeed different from those that followed. Characteristically, they drew on (...) history and psychology. They were interested in the genesis of concepts, the evolution of theories and the patterns of discovery. If rational reconstruction and logical analysis were admitted, these techniques were counter-balanced by historical study. In view of recent evolutions in philosophy of science — the growing importance of cognitive science, history of science, interdisciplinarity — it is worthwhile to return again to the beginning of the twentieth century. The aim of this paper is then to reexamine the relation between Duhem and Mach, in particular with regard to the methods whereby they sought to provide a philosophical reflection on science. (shrink)

Pendant un demi-siècle, la méthode appropriée en philosophie des sciences dans la tradition continentale était l'étude historique ; dans la tradition anglosaxonne, l'analyse logique. Ce clivage au sein du discours philosophique s'est grandement estompé de nos jours. D'une part, Kuhn a défendu la pertinence philosophique de l'histoire des sciences. D'autre part, Vuillemin et Gilles-Gaston Granger ont promu l'étude de la philosophie analytique et l'emploi de ses techniques logiques. Le rapprochement des deux traditions a pris encore une nouvelle tournure dans les (...) derniers textes de Feyerabend et dans les travaux de Ian Hacking. Celui-ci associe délibérément les instruments historiques de l'école française avec les procédés logiques de l'école nordaméricaine. Quelle est la signification de ce rapprochement ? Quels problèmes fait-il surgir ? Quelles directions de recherche ouvre-t-il ? Telles sont les questions que nous aborderons par le biais d'une étude comparée de certains développements récents de la philosophie des sciences en France et en Amérique du Nord. For over half a century the continental tradition favored a historical method in philosophy of science, while the Anglo-American tradition promoted a logical method. In recent years this contrast has tended to lessen. On the one hand, there has been a growing interest since the 1970s in France for the analytic tradition, due to the pioneering studies of Vuillemin and Gilles-Gaston Granger. On the other hand, Kuhn has brought out the philosophical relevance of history of science. This tendency takes a new turn in Feyerabend's final texts as well as in the works of Ian Hacking. The latter deliberately combines the historical instruments of the French school with the logical techniques of the North-American school. How to understand this evolution ? What directions of research does it open up ? I address these questions by way of a comparative study of some recent developments in philosophy of science both in France and North America. (shrink)

The series Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science was conceived in the broadest framework of interdisciplinary and international concerns.

Duhem first expounds the holistic thesis, according to which an experimental test always involves several hypotheses, in articles dating from the 1890s. Poincaré's analysis of a recent experiment in optics provides the incentive, but Duhem generalizes this analysis and develops a highly original methodological position. He is led to reject inductivism. I will endeavor to show the crucial role history of science comes to play in the development of Duhem's holism.

In 1929 Moritz Schlick and those scholars he had brought together came to realize that they had given rise to something entirely new, so the text of the Vienna Circle Manifesto has it. What was novel was the conception of the world, henceforth scientific. Or as we may put it otherwise: a discipline had been established, the philosophy of science, that is a reflection on science no longer subordinate to traditional theory of knowledge and metaphysics. The text goes on to (...) explain why such a conception arose geographically where it did: “That Vienna was specially suitable ground for [the development of the spirit of a scientific conception of the world] is historically understandable” 1. The Vienna Circle Manifesto proceeds to enumerate the multifarious intellectual movements that were brought together at the beginning of the 20th century in the city of Vienna. Is it irrelevant or untimely to emphasize this cosmopolitan spirit? I believe, on the contrary, that cosmopolitanism provides both a lesson about philosophical creativity and a key for understanding the vitality of Viennese philosophy: the achievements of the Vienna Circle were the result of an exceptional open-mindedness on the part of its members. (shrink)

Following the standard view, scientific theories are formal systems, which receive empirical content by way of certain correspondence rules. The task of philosophy of science is then to make explicit the structure of such systems. In contrast to this view, one can point to the French tradition in philosophy of science. What characterizes this tradition is recourse to historical study, which has evolved from an attempt to bridge the fields of philosophy of science and history of science by a closer (...) integration of conceptual and historical methods. My aim in this paper is to explore the emergence of historical epistemology in France and its later revival at an international level. Attention is directed at the presuppositions and motivations underlying such an approach. (shrink)

L’emploi par Poincaré de la notion de convention au sujet des hypothèses géométriques signale un déplacement par rapport aux problématiques traditionnelles. La découverte des géométries non euclidiennes montre qu’il n’y a pas de cadre spatial unique ; plusieurs systèmes sont possibles. On affirme ainsi l’existence d’un aspect essentiel de la connaissance qui ne dérive pas des faits et ne relève ni de l’inné ni de l’intuition. L’introduction de la notion de convention, dont il s’agit de prendre la mesure, ouvre la (...) voie à une prise en compte des facteurs décisionnels en science. Nous nous proposons, dans cet article, d’analyser l’argumentation de Poincaré en reconstruisant sa position face aux doctrines de Kant et de Mill.By understanding geometrical hypotheses as conventions, Poincaré significantly alters the traditional philosophical discussion of space. The discovery of non-Euclidean geometries proves that there is not a single spatial framework ; several systems are possible. Thus, there is an essential feature of knowledge that derives neither from empirical facts nor from intuition or innate understanding. The introduction of the notion of convention, whose significance is at issue here, provides a way of understanding the element of free choice in science. This article aims at analyzing Poincaré’s reasoning, by contrasting his viewpoint with that of Kant and Mill. (shrink)

Si l’oeuvre d’historien de la philosophie que Brunschvicg a élaborée est largement reconnue, ses efforts dans le champ de ce qu’il nommait philosophie scientifique soulèvent une certaine perplexité. Ce versant de son oeuvre aurait été éclipsé par Bachelard et sa philosophie du nouvel esprit scientifique. L’avènement de la philosophie analytique et sa réception en France auraient achevé de rejeter dans l’ombre la critique brunschvicgienne de la philosophie de la logique de Russell. Pourtant, Brunschvicg a oeuvré sans relâche à un rapprochement (...) entre philosophie et science. Il a entrepris un examen précis et approfondi des théories les plus récentes des mathématiques et de la physique. Or on constate aujourd’hui une exigence accrue en matière d’histoire et une multiplication des méthodes d’investigation. Le but de cet article est d’interroger à nouveaux frais la pensée épistémologique de Brunschvicg. (shrink)

Recent research has brought to light numerous facts that go against received views of the development of philosophy of science. One encounters several concepts, claims, or projects much earlier than is generally acknowledged. Auguste Comte was careful to distinguish each major science with respect to method and object, speaking of mathematical philosophy, biological philosophy, sociological philosophy, and so forth. He thereby in a sense anticipated the regionalist turn: philosophical analysis should be carried out with respect to a specific body of (...) knowledge. He also adopted a general perspective, a scientific philosophy. In the light of new discoveries, later thinkers such as Pierre Duhem, Gaston Milhaud, and Abel Rey endeavored to reformulate Comte’s doctrine as a neopositivism, a logical positivism, or an absolute positivism. The aim of this article is to examine the constitutive concepts mentioned and the controversies that hinge on them, in an effort to reach a precise understanding of the aim, scope, and import of philosophy of science in the context of nineteenth-century France. (shrink)

The aim of this paper is to study scientific observation from a broad perspective, taking into account history, practice and philosophical reflexivity. I shall draw on a series of new approaches variously termed: historical epistemology, history of philosophy of science, science studies, etc. Such approaches were undoubtedly sparked by the difficulties that philosophy of science encountered: if the idea of a neutral language of observation has been abandoned, debate remains as to the character and degree of the theory-ladenness of facts. (...) Two case studies will be considered: observation in the birth of modern science and observation in the life sciences. These will enable us to follow the evolution of the related concepts of accuracy, exactness and precision, as features that render an observation scientific. On closer inspection it appears that these concepts are not given spontaneously; they had to be constructed, and this process was intimately bound up with the development of knowledge. (shrink)

On souligne couramment la pluralité des sciences et la diversité de ses méthodes. Devons-nous pour autant nous résigner à cette situation de fait ? Il s’agit d’interroger, à partir de l’oeuvre meyersonienne, la tension entre la spécialisation sans cesse accrue et la nécessaire coordination des faits. Cette oeuvre fournit l’exemple d’un projet encyclopédique souple, dans lequel l’épistémologie permet de transcender les cloisonnements disciplinaires.Today, the burden of proof appears to rest on those who defend the unity of the sciences. Yet, in (...) scientific research, concepts and methods are transposed from one field to another, and interdisciplinary approaches flourish. Meyerson provides the opportunity to take up this issue once again. His work offers the example of a moderate unitary conception of science. It is encyclopedic but not reductionist. (shrink)

_Questions of Form _was first published in 1989. Minnesota Archive Editions uses digital technology to make long-unavailable books once again accessible, and are published unaltered from the original University of Minnesota Press editions. In _Questions on Form_, Joelle Proust traces the concept of the analytic proposition from Kant's development of the notion down to its place in the work of Rudolf Carnap, a founder of logical empiricism and a key figure in contemporary analytic philosophy. Using a method known in France (...) as _topique comparative_,she provides a rigorous exposition of analyticity, situating it within four major philosophical systems—those of Kant, Bolzano, Frege, and Carnap—and clearly delineating its development from one system to the next. Proust takes as her point of departure Kant's distinction between analytic and synthetic judgments. Though she makes clear that Kant drew on Locke, Hume, and Leibniz, she argues that his notion of analyticity was innovative, not simply an elaboration of something already found in their work. She shows that the analytic proposition unexpectedly came to play an important part in efforts to convert problems considered "transcendental" into questions of belonging to formal logic. Ultimately, her comparison of their systems reveals that the concept of the analytic, however specific its rile in each, remains linked to a foundationalist strategy—in effect, to the transcendentalist questions Kant used when he reinterpreted the findings of his empiricist predecessors. Hence, this book's provocative claim: today's so-called logical empiricism owes much more to Kant's notion of science than to Hume's. (shrink)

The aim of this article is to examine the reception of French philosophy of scienceFrench philosophy of science on the world stage, taking up what was a constant concern of Jean Gayon. Three major features distinguish this tradition. First, the use of the term epistemologyEpistemology to designate philosophy of science, thereby allowing for discontinuities between common knowledge and scientific knowledge. Secondly, the conviction that philosophy of science should be grounded on history of scienceHistory of science. Finally, what has come to (...) be called the regional turn: philosophical reflection should be carried out with respect to a specific body of knowledge. These directions of research, which have been cultivated for over a century by French thinkers, emerged belatedly within the Anglo-American tradition. Gayon devoted particular attention to the case of philosophy of biology. I complement his endeavor by an examination of philosophy of chemistry. Such divergences raise the question of the relations between the two traditions. It is only recently, with the advent of a newHistorical epistemologyhistorical epistemologyGayon, JeanOn historical epistemology, that a true dialogue has been established. However, the many misunderstandings that have arisen between French and Anglo-American philosophy of sciencePhilosophy of science (Anglo-American), show how fragile such a dialogue is. (shrink)

The following is an essay review of Paul Needham's translation of Pierre Duhem's Lemixte et la combinaison chimique and a numberof other essays. In this review we describe theintent and general features of Le mixte and try to place it in the larger context of Duhem'sprogram for energetics. The long essay (Essay3) opposing Marcellin Berthelot'sthermochemistry is singled out for detailedcommentary, since it gives Duhem's reasons forendorsing Josiah Willard Gibbs's chemicalstatics. We argue that a chemical mechanics ofa Gibbsian sort, defended in (...) Le mixte and otheressays in this volume, was the inspiration for,and basis of, Duhem's energetics. Needham'swelcome translations help an English-languageaudience to better understand the basiccontours of Duhem's important, if ultimatelymisguided, project. We conclude with somecomments on the difficulties in translatingDuhem and on the quality of the translationsNeedham has provided. (shrink)

By starting from a reflection on the article by Anastasios Brenner which precedes mine in this edited book, I discuss the 'difficult' relation of history and philosophy, and draw examples from the tradition of historical epistemology. On this basis, I evaluate the current status of history of philosophy of science, and I conclude with the defence of a truly historical approach to philosophy of science and of the philosopher's reflexivity.