appears as a centre of perspective. By thinking in analogies, such point in astronomy is the Sun, and Copernicus as a Neoplatonist has been convinced that Sun
should be in the centre of Universe! Epistemic deduction by which the heliocentric
system could be finally tested has used the time of few centuries, and the significant
development of astronomical methods. Though, as we will see later in the case
studies from chemistry, radical Popperian falsificationism in evaluation of scientific
concepts could also slow down the development of science.
The deeper insight into the debates within the Vienna Circle reveals that almost
none of the case studies about the structure of scientific theories has been used from
chemistry. Does it mean that for the philosophers within the Vienna Circle
chemistry is not a science? Some of reasons for the absence of chemistry were
undoubtedly also in the sort of education of the most important scientists in this
Community. There we can find mathematicians, physicists, biologists, but no
chemists! Since the Vienna Circle was the main melting pot from which philosophy
of science has emerged, the nonexistence of chemistry could be assumed. Radical
reductionistic epistemology in the Vienna Circle includes also the statement that
science is unique, hence, there are no distinct disciplines, since all the knowledge
could be reduced to physics [18]. This has been the central idea of a series of
scientific conferences under the title International Congress for the Unity of Science, which have been held between the years 1931 and 1940. Discussions on these
meetings were focused on logics, mathematics, physics, biology, psychology, even
economy and linguistics, but there was no chemistry (neither geology).
Among the first scientists, who have used chemistry for study philosophy of
science were Friedrich Wilhelm Ostwald (1853–1932) and already mentioned
Pierre Duhem. Both were known as scientists and philosophers who have been
focused on the epistemology that emerges from the research in classical thermodynamics rather than from classical mechanics. For Ostwald and Duhem the
background of all the Universe is energy, and not the mater mechanically structured
from atoms. In contrast to Duhem, Ostwald has changed his opinion regarding the
existence of atoms only after the year 1897, when Thomson discovered electron
(Sir Joseph J. Thomson, 1856–1940). In spite to this, Pierre Duhem was one of
the first scientists who studied systematically chemical epistemology by analysing
the appearence of the structural theory in the historical context. For Duhem, science
is not understandable without the systematic study of the history of science. Consequently, philosophy of chemistry can be developed only within the historical
reconstruction of scientific discoveries.
Entering of chemistry in the philosophy of science through the ample door
appeared after the work of Thomas Kuhn (Thomas Kuhn, 1922–1996) who was
one of the establishers of sociology science. In his masterwork The Structure of
Scientific Revolution [19]. Kuhn investigate the structure, development, and functioning of science by using chemistry as a case study. Kuhn has accepted the
Duhemian idea that the development of science is continuous, but he also asserts
that this development is oscillating between the periods which he calls normal
science, and the periods of scientific revolutions. During the period of the normal
science, the scientific activity is focused on the problem solving within the bundle
12
1 Chemistry and Philosophy of Science
should be in the centre of Universe! Epistemic deduction by which the heliocentric
system could be finally tested has used the time of few centuries, and the significant
development of astronomical methods. Though, as we will see later in the case
studies from chemistry, radical Popperian falsificationism in evaluation of scientific
concepts could also slow down the development of science.
The deeper insight into the debates within the Vienna Circle reveals that almost
none of the case studies about the structure of scientific theories has been used from
chemistry. Does it mean that for the philosophers within the Vienna Circle
chemistry is not a science? Some of reasons for the absence of chemistry were
undoubtedly also in the sort of education of the most important scientists in this
Community. There we can find mathematicians, physicists, biologists, but no
chemists! Since the Vienna Circle was the main melting pot from which philosophy
of science has emerged, the nonexistence of chemistry could be assumed. Radical
reductionistic epistemology in the Vienna Circle includes also the statement that
science is unique, hence, there are no distinct disciplines, since all the knowledge
could be reduced to physics [18]. This has been the central idea of a series of
scientific conferences under the title International Congress for the Unity of Science, which have been held between the years 1931 and 1940. Discussions on these
meetings were focused on logics, mathematics, physics, biology, psychology, even
economy and linguistics, but there was no chemistry (neither geology).
Among the first scientists, who have used chemistry for study philosophy of
science were Friedrich Wilhelm Ostwald (1853–1932) and already mentioned
Pierre Duhem. Both were known as scientists and philosophers who have been
focused on the epistemology that emerges from the research in classical thermodynamics rather than from classical mechanics. For Ostwald and Duhem the
background of all the Universe is energy, and not the mater mechanically structured
from atoms. In contrast to Duhem, Ostwald has changed his opinion regarding the
existence of atoms only after the year 1897, when Thomson discovered electron
(Sir Joseph J. Thomson, 1856–1940). In spite to this, Pierre Duhem was one of
the first scientists who studied systematically chemical epistemology by analysing
the appearence of the structural theory in the historical context. For Duhem, science
is not understandable without the systematic study of the history of science. Consequently, philosophy of chemistry can be developed only within the historical
reconstruction of scientific discoveries.
Entering of chemistry in the philosophy of science through the ample door
appeared after the work of Thomas Kuhn (Thomas Kuhn, 1922–1996) who was
one of the establishers of sociology science. In his masterwork The Structure of
Scientific Revolution [19]. Kuhn investigate the structure, development, and functioning of science by using chemistry as a case study. Kuhn has accepted the
Duhemian idea that the development of science is continuous, but he also asserts
that this development is oscillating between the periods which he calls normal
science, and the periods of scientific revolutions. During the period of the normal
science, the scientific activity is focused on the problem solving within the bundle
12
1 Chemistry and Philosophy of Science