Pierre Duhem’s use of the return to the sources as a justification tool

Benjamin Le Roux,Marcin Krasnodębski

doi:10.24117/2526-2270.2017.i3.04

Benjamin Le Roux, Marcin Krasnodębski

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.24117/2526-2270.2017.i3.04

Copy DOI

Abstract

Les origines de la statique, published in 1905 by physicist and historian of physical theories Pierre Duhem, offers not only a radically new interpretation of the history of statics but also represents a milestone in the methodology of history of science thanks to a particular form of historical reasoning as deployed by the author to justify his hypotheses. This article uses a quantitative analysis of the references contained in the book’s footnotes in order to study the way Duhem validated his assertions. We highlight in particular his relentless will to return to the original texts. This method is one of the reasons why Duhem’s book (and more generally the Duhemian methodology) had such a lasting impact on French epistemology.

Highlights

The methodology in history of science has been the subject of numerous ongoing debates and discussions
We codified data extracted from 467 footnotes distributed over 360 pages of the first volume of Les origines de la statique
Before starting the interpretation phase, it is crucial to verify whether the footnotes constitute a justification tool in Les origines de la statique at all

Summary

Introduction

The methodology in history of science has been the subject of numerous ongoing debates and discussions. It is easy to forget today that the methodological canon has evolved incessantly and that its development is due to pioneers of the discipline who laid its foundations throughout the 20th century. Georges Sarton defended the place of history of Pierre Duhem’s Use of the Return to the Sources as a Justification Tool Benjamin Le Roux - Marcin Krasnodębski science as a separate discipline on its own.. A generation of historians and sociologists, such as Hessen, Bernal or Merton, “discovered” the role of the socio-economic context in the history of science (Lamy and Saint-Martin 2014). Jacques Roger, among many others, called for a “historian” history of science as opposed to sociological or philosophical approaches (Roger 1995)

Objectives

Results

Conclusion