Talking at cross-purposes: how Einstein and the logical empiricists never agreed on what they were disagreeing about

Synthese 190 (17):3819-3863 (2013)

Authors
Marco Giovanelli
Universität Tübingen
Abstract
By inserting the dialogue between Einstein, Schlick and Reichenbach into a wider network of debates about the epistemology of geometry, this paper shows that not only did Einstein and Logical Empiricists come to disagree about the role, principled or provisional, played by rods and clocks in General Relativity, but also that in their lifelong interchange, they never clearly identified the problem they were discussing. Einstein’s reflections on geometry can be understood only in the context of his ”measuring rod objection” against Weyl. On the contrary, Logical Empiricists, though carefully analyzing the Einstein–Weyl debate, tried to interpret Einstein’s epistemology of geometry as a continuation of the Helmholtz–Poincaré debate by other means. The origin of the misunderstanding, it is argued, should be found in the failed appreciation of the difference between a “Helmholtzian” and a “Riemannian” tradition. The epistemological problems raised by General Relativity are extraneous to the first tradition and can only be understood in the context of the latter, the philosophical significance of which, however, still needs to be fully explored
Keywords Logical empiricism  Moritz Schlick  Hans Reichenbach   Albert Einstein  Hermann Weyl  Epistemology of geometry
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2013
DOI 10.1007/s11229-012-0229-1
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 38,984
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Quantum Dialogue: The Making of a Revolution.Mara Beller - 1999 - University of Chicago Press.

View all 79 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Why Einstein Did Not Believe That General Relativity Geometrizes Gravity.Dennis Lehmkuhl - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 46 (2):316-326.
‘But One Must Not Legalize the Mentioned Sin’: Phenomenological Vs. Dynamical Treatments of Rods and Clocks in Einstein׳s Thought.Marco Giovanelli - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 48 (1):20-44.
The Conventionality of Simultaneity in Einstein’s Practical Chrono-Geometry.Mario Bacelar Valente - 2017 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 32 (2):177-190.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Erich Kretschmann as a Proto-Logical-Empiricist: Adventures and Misadventures of the Point-Coincidence Argument.Marco Giovanelli - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 44 (2):115-134.
Purposes and Cross-Purposes.Ruth Garrett Millikan - 2001 - The Monist 84 (3):392-416.
Einstein and the Most Beautiful Theories in Physics.Gideon Engler - 2002 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 16 (1):27 – 37.
Explanatory Unification.Philip Kitcher - 1981 - Philosophy of Science 48 (4):507-531.
Are Dinosaurs Extinct?Richard Creath - 1995 - Foundations of Science 1 (2):285-297.
Realism, Empiricism and Scientific Revolutions.Patrick Enfield - 1991 - Philosophy of Science 58 (3):468-485.
Denial of the Synthetic "A Priori".Oliver A. Johnson - 1960 - Philosophy 35 (134):255 - 264.
Cross Purposes in Aesthetic Theory.Charles E. Whitmore - 1921 - The Monist 31 (4):601-608.
In Defence of Einstein.Gerald Keaney - 2008 - Crossroads 3 (1):64-68 Free Online.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-12-15

Total views
42 ( #171,865 of 2,319,641 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #807,847 of 2,319,641 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature