Since the uncertainty of the results of experiments in protochemistry was quite
contrary to the certainty of the predictions of events on the sky in protophysics, the
language for the description and explanation of experiments had to be accommodated to this new “ambivalent” discipline. While the language, say scientific language, of astronomy and geometry was already almost defined and accepted
because it was based on the mathematized approach to the space and time, the
language of protochemistry was, in contrary, quite vague, ambiguous, and individual. In contrast to the ancient astronomers, say, protophysicists, which had a sort
of scientific language understandable for all, the protochemists were individuals in
that. Their experiments were indeterministic, and the regularities of particular
experimental observations were in principle statistical, they appeared only after a
series of repetitions. Scientific language for the representation of the indeterministic
experiments should have the same nature—it must also be indeterministic. It must
be a secret, an Arcanic language, which was often understandable only to the author
of the text. Moreover, protochemists even intended to make their language as vague
as possible, because the idea of the public rapport about their experiments and
reflections was unacceptable for them. Protochemists not only disregarded their
successors, but they considered them as undesirable. In the chapters that follow I
will show how the protochemical language in its arcanic structure has reached a
peak in the later European alchemy. A narrow connection of the language and
practice, in the early time of the secret experiments and secret language, played a
key role in the formation of almost all chemical theories. Interweave of the syntax
of the chemical language, as well as the quantifications of observations of the
substance transformations were in the core from which the structural theory in
19th century has been constructed.
The sublunary world as a reflection of the events in heaven was present in the
symbolism that protochemists have used for the representation of metals [3]. The
symbols for metals and the symbols for heavenly bodies were the same. That means
that both the symbols are nothing else but the reflection of some higher abstract
spiritual structure. Seven heavenly bodies, five planets, Sun, and Moon were in
analogy with the seven known metals. In a remarkable literary text by Bela Hanvas
(1897–1968) it can be find that Adamantius Origen (184/5–253/4), the professor at
the Alexandrian Museum, has presented his lectures simultaneously in seven languages because he intended to demonstrate the deeper meaning of abstract concepts.
Historically, it is known from the documents, that Origen had probably the highest
influence on the emergence of the six lingual Bible (‘Enapka, Hexapla, six-fould) in
which the texts on different languages were represented in six parallel columns. The
method of analogy that is apparent in this symbolism appeared as more and more
powerful contrast to the method of logics. While physicists in their analysis of the
structure of the World have a support in logics, chemists are contemplating by using
analogy. As we will see later, analogy is a sort of the qualitative category. This
epistemological polarization in logics and analogy is one of the arguments that
support our thesis about the different origins of chemistry and physics.
Experiment, philosophy, and mysticism were in different ratios entangled in the
works of early protochemists [2]. Two of them have used the name of Democritus.
34
3 Synthesis of Philosophy and Technology
contrary to the certainty of the predictions of events on the sky in protophysics, the
language for the description and explanation of experiments had to be accommodated to this new “ambivalent” discipline. While the language, say scientific language, of astronomy and geometry was already almost defined and accepted
because it was based on the mathematized approach to the space and time, the
language of protochemistry was, in contrary, quite vague, ambiguous, and individual. In contrast to the ancient astronomers, say, protophysicists, which had a sort
of scientific language understandable for all, the protochemists were individuals in
that. Their experiments were indeterministic, and the regularities of particular
experimental observations were in principle statistical, they appeared only after a
series of repetitions. Scientific language for the representation of the indeterministic
experiments should have the same nature—it must also be indeterministic. It must
be a secret, an Arcanic language, which was often understandable only to the author
of the text. Moreover, protochemists even intended to make their language as vague
as possible, because the idea of the public rapport about their experiments and
reflections was unacceptable for them. Protochemists not only disregarded their
successors, but they considered them as undesirable. In the chapters that follow I
will show how the protochemical language in its arcanic structure has reached a
peak in the later European alchemy. A narrow connection of the language and
practice, in the early time of the secret experiments and secret language, played a
key role in the formation of almost all chemical theories. Interweave of the syntax
of the chemical language, as well as the quantifications of observations of the
substance transformations were in the core from which the structural theory in
19th century has been constructed.
The sublunary world as a reflection of the events in heaven was present in the
symbolism that protochemists have used for the representation of metals [3]. The
symbols for metals and the symbols for heavenly bodies were the same. That means
that both the symbols are nothing else but the reflection of some higher abstract
spiritual structure. Seven heavenly bodies, five planets, Sun, and Moon were in
analogy with the seven known metals. In a remarkable literary text by Bela Hanvas
(1897–1968) it can be find that Adamantius Origen (184/5–253/4), the professor at
the Alexandrian Museum, has presented his lectures simultaneously in seven languages because he intended to demonstrate the deeper meaning of abstract concepts.
Historically, it is known from the documents, that Origen had probably the highest
influence on the emergence of the six lingual Bible (‘Enapka, Hexapla, six-fould) in
which the texts on different languages were represented in six parallel columns. The
method of analogy that is apparent in this symbolism appeared as more and more
powerful contrast to the method of logics. While physicists in their analysis of the
structure of the World have a support in logics, chemists are contemplating by using
analogy. As we will see later, analogy is a sort of the qualitative category. This
epistemological polarization in logics and analogy is one of the arguments that
support our thesis about the different origins of chemistry and physics.
Experiment, philosophy, and mysticism were in different ratios entangled in the
works of early protochemists [2]. Two of them have used the name of Democritus.
34
3 Synthesis of Philosophy and Technology