Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1028-1038 (2003)
|Abstract||Lawrence Sklar in his book, Physics and Chance (1993), proposes a sophisticated account of reduction of thermodynamics (TD) by statistical mechanics (SM). I argue that Sklar's analysis of the alleged reduction of TD by SM is problematic in several respects. I consider a few counterexamples to show that none of what Sklar takes to be the central features of successful reduction in science (unification and identification) holds in the case of TD and SM. I suggest the broader conclusion that a more useful way of understanding the relationship between TD and SM is as collaboration and competition among alternative methodologies rather than reduction of one theory to another.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Kevin Morris (2009). Does Functional Reduction Need Bridge Laws? A Response to Marras. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (3):647-657.
Thomas Nickles (2005). Problem Reduction: Some Thoughts. Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 84 (1):107-133.
Gerhard Ernst & Andreas Hüttemann (eds.) (2010). Time, Chance and Reduction: Philosophical Aspects of Statistical Mechanics. Cambridge University Press.
Geoffrey Hellman (1999). Reduction(?) to What? Comments on L. Sklar's "The Reduction (?) of Thermodynamics to Statistical Mechanics". Philosophical Studies 95 (1/2):203 - 214.
Lawrence Sklar (1999). The Reduction(?) Of Thermodynamics to Statistical Mechanics. Philosophical Studies 95 (1-2):187 - 202.
Lawrence Sklar (1993). Physics and Chance: Philosophical Issues in the Foundations of Statistical Mechanics. Cambridge University Press.
David L. Hull (1981). Reduction and Genetics. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 6 (2):125-144.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads33 ( #41,931 of 722,826 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,826 )
How can I increase my downloads?