David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In Michael Heidelberger & Gregor Schiemann (eds.), The Significance of the Hypothetical in the Natural Sciences. de Gruyter (2009)
In this paper I argue against readings of Hertz that overly assimilate him into the thought of late 20th century anti-realists and pluralists. Firstly, as is well-known, various images of the same objects are possible according to Hertz. However, I will argue that this envisaged pluralism concerns the situation before all the evidence is considered i. e. before we can decide whether the images are correct and appropriate. Hertz believes in final and decisive battles of the kind he participated in while doing experiments in electrodynamics. Secondly, I will argue that the concept of representation is still quite appropriately applied to important aspects of images, namely when it comes to fundamental physical equations. In this context Hertz explicitly allows that “characteristics of our image, which claim to represent observable relations of things, do really and correctly correspond to them” (Hertz  1956, 9). A final consideration is Hertz’s consistent appeal to the concept of the hypothesis. I will argue that his use of the concept does not indicate that he contributed to an increasing hypothetization of science, if this trend is understood in a strong sense, i. e. as the belief that the correctness of scientific theories cannot be established for principled reasons. As mentioned, when it comes to experimental evidence Hertz believes in decisive battles.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
J. J. C. Smart (1951). Heinrich Hertz and the Concept of Force. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 29 (1):36 – 45.
Peter Achinstein (1994). Explanation V. Prediction: Which Carries More Weight? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:156 - 164.
A. Nordmann (2000). Heinrich Hertz: Scientific Biography and Experimental Life. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 31 (3):537-549.
Peter C. Kjaergaard (2002). Hertz and Wittgenstein's Philosophy of Science. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 33 (1):121-149.
Lydia Patton (2004). Hermann Cohen's History and Philosophy of Science. Dissertation, McGill University
Murat BaÇ (2000). Structure Versus Process: Mach, Hertz, and the Normative Aspect of Science. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 31 (1):39-56.
Sara Bizarro (2010). A Hertzian Interpretation of Wittgenstein's Tractatus. Eidos: Revista de Filosofía de la Universidad Del Norte 13:150-165.
Frederik Voetmann Christiansen (2006). Heinrich Hertz's Neo-Kantian Philosophy of Science, and its Development by Harald Høffding. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 37 (1):1 - 20.
J. Mattingly (2001). The Replication of Hertz's Cathode Ray Experiments. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 32 (1):53-75.
John Preston (2006). Janik on Hertz and the Early Wittgenstein. Grazer Philosophische Studien 73 (1):83-95.
Added to index2010-05-22
Total downloads114 ( #14,206 of 1,696,808 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #72,060 of 1,696,808 )
How can I increase my downloads?