Abstract
The aim of this paper is to present Duhem’s critical view of the dynamical development of mechanics according to two principles of his theory of the development of physics: the continuous and the rational development of physics. These two principles impose a formal conception of physics that aims at demarcating physics from the metaphysical view on the one hand and the pragmatist/conventionalist view on the other hand. Duhem pursues an intermediary conception of physics, a representational system of empirical laws based upon formal principles. This formal conception of physics will adjust to his idea of scientific progress in the form of a sequence of representational systems as structures of increasing comprehensiveness of empirical laws, which leads him to defend a convergent structural realism pointing to an ideal physical theory.
Highlights
The aim of this paper is to present Duhem’s critical view of the development of mechanics according to two principles of his dynamical theory of the development of physics: the continuous and the rational development of physics (Duhem 1980, 188)
Duhem pursues a formal conception of physics that he defines as a representational system of empirical laws based upon formal principles (Duhem 1974, 19; 1902b, 5), a middle way between
We have argued that a complete point of view of Duhem’s continuous and rational development of physics can be condensed as his defense of a conception of physics according to which physics should be a representational system with very few formal principles coordinating the set of empirical laws (Duhem 1974, 19; 1902b, 5) which works as an intermediary or a middle way between the metaphysical and a pragmatist/conventionalist conception of theoretical physics (Chiappin 1989, iv, 92; Duhem 1917, 157)
Summary
The aim of this paper is to present Duhem’s critical view of the development of mechanics according to two principles of his dynamical theory of the development of physics: the continuous and the rational development of physics (Duhem 1980, 188). This means in mechanical theory that: i) the physical concepts used in the empirical laws must be defined in terms of geometrical and mechanical properties of a material system (for example, particles in motion in Descartes’s view, matter and repulsive/attractive forces in the mechanical-molecular tradition of Laplace and Poisson, the continuous medium of Fresnel’s and Maxwell’s ether); ii) there is an additional supposition that these mechanical concepts are restricted to mass, size, motion and/or force Duhem spells out this additional condition as follows: “When we propose to construct a mechanical theory, we impose upon ourselves another obligation which consists in putting, into these definitions and hypotheses, only a very restricted number of notions of a determined nature [mass, size, motion and/or force]” (Duhem 1892, 156). An understanding of the differences between these two views is central to understanding Duhem’s view of a conception of physical theory as an intermediary or a middle way (tertium) between them
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
