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)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
The Lavoisier Revolution: Some Philosophical Aspects.F. Michael Akeroyd - 2002 - Kem. Ind 51:393-396.
Structural Realism Versus Standard Scientific Realism: The Case of Phlogiston and Dephlogisticated Air.James Ladyman - 2011 - Synthese 180 (2):87 - 101.
Chemistry, a Lingua Philosophica.Guillermo Restrepo & José Villaveces - 2011 - Foundations of Chemistry 13 (3):233-249.
From Phlogiston to Caloric: Chemical Ontologies. [REVIEW]Mi Kim - 2011 - Foundations of Chemistry 13 (3):201-222.
Rhetoric and Nomenclature in Lavoisier's Chemical Language.Wilda Anderson - 1985 - Topoi 4 (2):165-169.
Lavoisier and Mendeleev on the Elements.Robin Findlay Hendry - 2004 - Foundations of Chemistry 7 (1):31-48.
The Conceptual Structure of the Chemical Revolution.Paul Thagard - 1990 - Philosophy of Science 57 (2):183-209.
Added to index2010-01-01
Total downloads51 ( #101,785 of 2,163,979 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #348,017 of 2,163,979 )
How can I increase my downloads?