Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||In this paper, I challenge the long-established view that the term phlogiston fails to refer. After a close examination of the reference of phlogiston during Lavoisier’s Chemical Revolution, I show that it referred throughout to a natural substance, fire matter. I state that Lavoisier eliminated the term but not its referent, which he renamed caloric, and I claim that it is in the historical and cultural context of the Chemical Revolution that the Lavoisier’s intentions can be understood.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
F. Michael Akeroyd (2002). The Lavoisier Revolution: Some Philosophical Aspects. Kem. Ind 51:393-396.
James Ladyman (2011). Structural Realism Versus Standard Scientific Realism: The Case of Phlogiston and Dephlogisticated Air. Synthese 180 (2):87 - 101.
Guillermo Restrepo & José Villaveces (2011). Chemistry, a Lingua Philosophica. Foundations of Chemistry 13 (3):233-249.
F. Michael Akeroyd (2008). Mechanistic Explanation Versus Deductive-Nomological Explanation. Foundations of Chemistry 10 (1):39-48.
Mi Kim (2011). From Phlogiston to Caloric: Chemical Ontologies. [REVIEW] Foundations of Chemistry 13 (3):201-222.
Wilda Anderson (1985). Rhetoric and Nomenclature in Lavoisier's Chemical Language. Topoi 4 (2):165-169.
Robin Findlay Hendry (2005). Lavoisier and Mendeleev on the Elements. Foundations of Chemistry 7 (1):31-48.
Paul Thagard (1990). The Conceptual Structure of the Chemical Revolution. Philosophy of Science 57 (2):183-209.
Lucía Lewowicz (2011). Phlogiston, Lavoisier and the Purloined Referent. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 42 (3):436-444.
Added to index2010-01-01
Total downloads9 ( #122,488 of 739,345 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,538 of 739,345 )
How can I increase my downloads?