Abstract
AbstractThis paper uses scientific perspectivism as a lens for understanding acid experiments from the Chemical Revolution. I argue that this account has several advantages over several recent interpretations of this period, interpretations that do not neatly capture some of the historical experiments on acids. The perspectival view is distinctive in that it avoids discontinuity, allows for the rational resolution of disagreement, and is sensitive to the historical epistemic context.
Highlights
A recent exchange between philosophers and historians of science has highlighted the continued importance of, and serious challenges associated with, interpreting events during the Chemical Revolution
I discuss the view that I think advances our thinking about the Chemical Revolution: perspectivism
This discussion showed that the revolutionary reading of the Chemical Revolution is not quite right
Summary
A recent exchange between philosophers and historians of science has highlighted the continued importance of, and serious challenges associated with, interpreting events during the Chemical Revolution. 3) Was change during the Chemical Revolution well motivated?. I will argue that 1) there was not quite a revolution, that 2) the disagreements were about the classification of several substances, and 3) that change during this period was well motivated. I discuss the view that I think advances our thinking about the Chemical Revolution: perspectivism (section 2). I show that these disagreements are best understood as perspectival and how doing so advances our characterization of this period. One view argues that this period was revolutionary in a strong sense. The other views emphasises the opposite: that there was great continuity in chemical theory and practice
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
