DOCSLIB.ORG

Two Letters from John Herschel to Charles Lyell, 1836-1837 Author(S): Walter F

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The Impact of Uniformitarianism: Two Letters from John Herschel to Charles Lyell, 1836-1837 Author(s): Walter F. Cannon Source: Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 105, No. 3 (Jun. 27, 1961), pp. 301-314 Published by: American Philosophical Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/985457 Accessed: 28-06-2018 03:03 UTC REFERENCES Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: http://www.jstor.org/stable/985457?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms American Philosophical Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society This content downloaded from 150.135.165.81 on Thu, 28 Jun 2018 03:03:33 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms THE IMPACT OF UNIFORMITARIANISM Two Letters from John Herschel to Charles Lyell, 1836-1837 WALTER F. CANNON Assistant Professor of History, University of California, Berkeley I. INTRODUCTION how new species are generated. Lyell himself CHARLES DARWIN began the Introduction to was too fearful of orthodox Christian opinion to On the Origin of Species by saying that his ob- assert a naturalistic origin of species in the Prin- servations in South America "seemed to throw ciples, especially as he could specify no mechanism whereby such generation could take place. In- some light on the origin of species-that mystery of mysteries, as it has been called by one of our deed, large parts of his second volume were de- greatest philosophers." The philosopher was the voted to a refutation of the evolutionary ideas of famous astronomer John Herschel, and the Lamarck, and this refutation became standard for the period. It is easy to see why Lyell wished phrase, "that mystery of mysteries," came from Herschel's monumental letter of February 20, to rebuff Lamarck. An evolutionary biology 1836, written from the Cape Colony (where would imply an evolutionary geology as well, Herschel was engaged in surveying the southern and Uniformitarianism pictured the world not as heavens) to his friend Charles Lyell. The letter having progressed from some initial chaos to its is here published in full for the first time, from present condition, but as having gone through an the manuscript in the Darwin-Lyell collection indefinite number of essentially repetitive stages. of the American Philosophical Society, together Lyell's opponents, who were named by one of with the surviving part of Herschel's follow-up their members the "Catastrophists," were quick letter of June 12, 1837.1 to point out Lyell's omission and rely upon it in constructing a logical case for the supernatural Herschel's 1836 letter is a major document nature of species creation.3 in the scientific controversies of the period. It was John Herschel, and not Lyell, who spoke Lyell's system of geology ("Uniformitarianism") out in favor of "a natural in contradistinction to as expounded in his Principles of Geology of a miraculous process" of species creation, and 1830-1833 had challenged contemporary British this part of his letter was made public in 1837 geological thought, which was still influenced in an appendix to Charles Babbage's Ninth (although not dominated) by the ideas of George Bridgewater Treatise. To appreciate the im- Cuvier and Cuvier's more impetuous English portance of this testimony it is necessary to recall disciple William Buckland.2 In addition, Lyell's John Herschel's enormous prestige in the 1830's system had also implicitly raised the question of and 1840's. As the son of the great William Herschel and as a brilliant astronomer in his I wish to thank the staffs of the Library of the Ameri- can Philosophical Society and of the Map Room of the own right, he was not merely the most famous Widener Library, Harvard University, for their inter- scientist in England: he was looked up to very ested as well as efficient assistance. much as though he were a god. The Duke of 2 The ideas of Buckland were challenged most heartily Sussex was only summing up the common opinion by John Fleming; see esp. The geological deluge, as inter- preted by Baron Cuvier and Professor Buckland, incon- when in his presidential address to the Royal sistent with the testimony of Moses and the phenomena Society in 1833 he said that Herschel was "such of nature, Edin. Philos. Jour. 14: 205-239, 1825-1826. a model of an accomplished philosopher as can Cuvier's English translator argued with his author in rarely be found beyond the regions of fiction." 4 notes: Cuvier, Georges, Essay o0t the theory of the earth, tr. Robert Jameson, 5th ed., 334, 429, 436, Edinburgh and Sheltered by Herschel's reputation, then, other London, 1827. The Quarterly Reviezwi began criticizing 3Whewell, William, Lyell's Geology, vol. 2, Quarterly Buckland as early as 1826, in Transactions of the Geo- Review 47: 126, 1832. For Catastrophist theory in gen- logical Society, Quarterly Review 34: 517-518, 1826 (the eral see my article, The problem of miracles in the 1830's, article was by young Charles Lyell). Equally important Victorian Studies 4: 5-32, 1960. is the fact that a number of geologists did not care very 4 Augustus Frederick, Duke of Sussex, Presidential much for theoretical matters of any kind. address of 1833, Phil. Trans. Abstracts 3: 224, 1830-1837. PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, VOL. 105, NO. 3, JUNE, 1961 301 This content downloaded from 150.135.165.81 on Thu, 28 Jun 2018 03:03:33 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 302 WALTER F. CANNON [PROC. AMER. PHIL. SOC. scientists could consider the problem of the origin of the origin of species would even be admissible. of species on its merits, without fear of religious That problem was settled, for competent intel- orthodoxy. Since Herschel was known to be a lectual circles, by John Herschel's expression of sincere Christian, only extremists could hence- belief in 1836. forth claim that scientists should submit their findings to an Evangelical interpretation of the Important as the first paragraph of Herschel's Bible. There were such extremists, of course, letter was at the time, the full text is of still but they had no influence on the course of sci- greater interest of the historian. First, it is the entific debate. Actually Lyell's ideas had been best document available to demonstrate the in- received much more graciously than he had ex- tellectual impact of Lyell's Principles. Herschel pected, for the Christians among the scientists does not merely say that he is impressed; he were just as eager as was Lyell to keep their demonstrates in page after page of suggestions, science from being subjected to undue influence queries, observations, and theorizing how thor- from scientifically illiterate Bibliolaters. It was oughly the most distinguished scientific mind of indeed such strategically placed Christians as the period has been stimulated by Lyell's argu- Adam Sedgwick at Cambridge, William Buck- ments. The busy astronomer has found time to land at Oxford, and William Vernon Harcourt read a twelve-hundred page book three times! at York who did combat most vigorously with "and every time with increased interest."8 Bibliolatry. Yet Lyell remained uneasy, and Second, Herschel's admiration of Lyell's ap- agreed only reluctantly to let Babbage print proach-extending even to a belief that it should Herschel's assertion. The still more explosive be applied in other sciences 9-was of consider- part of Herschel's letter, in which he suggests able importance in the strictly geological debates 50,000 years apiece as the age of the Patriarchs, of the period. Lyell's Uniformitarian system was thousands of millions of years for each of the by no means readily accepted by his fellow geolo- Days of Creation, and a view of Biblical miracles gists, even when the particular contents of his which makes them essentially subj ective experi- volumes were admired, as they almost universally ences,5 never did get into print. were. Indeed Uniformitarianism never became As young Charles Darwin developed scien- the dominant geological school in England all the tifically in the sheltered arena of the Geological way down to 1859, when both Uniformitarianism Society of London, the matter is of some im- and Catastrophism as distinct schools were portance in interpreting his development. Darwin swallowed up in the new evolutionary approach. was able to be almost completely insensitive to But while the testimony of young Charles Darwin theological considerations concerning the origin gave Lyell expert field support, the adherence of species, so much so that he did not even under- of John Herschel meant that the Catastrophist stand what the phrase "the creation of species" opposition could not solidify as a mathematically- meant to the people he criticized. In his 1842 oriented Cambridge group, as might otherwise sketch he presented the crude notion that a have happened. To understand the situation, it "creationist" must believe that the individual is necessary to know the personal relations of the species of rhinoceros have arbitrarily come to- principal characters. John Herschel, Charles Bab- gether from the dust.6 This notion bears no re- bage, William Whewell, and George Peacock had lation to the carefully rationalized explanation of been Cambridge contemporaries who had coop- such a Catastrophist as, say, William Whewell.
Recommended publications
  • Formal and Informal Networks of Knowledge and Etheldred Benett's

    Formal and Informal Networks of Knowledge and Etheldred Benett's

    Journal of Literature and Science Volume 8, No. 1 (2015) ISSN 1754-646X Susan Pickford, “Social Authorship, Networks of Knowledge”: 69-85 “I have no pleasure in collecting for myself alone”:1 Social Authorship, Networks of Knowledge and Etheldred Benett’s Catalogue of the Organic Remains of the County of Wiltshire (1831) Susan Pickford As with many other fields of scientific endeavour, the relationship between literature and geology has proved a fruitful arena for research in recent years. Much of this research has focused on the founding decades of the earth sciences in the early- to mid-nineteenth century, with recent articles by Gowan Dawson and Laurence Talairach-Vielmas joining works such as Noah Heringman’s Romantic Rocks, Aesthetic Geology (2003), Ralph O’Connor’s The Earth on Show: Fossils and the Poetics of Popular Science, 1802-1856 (2007), Virginia Zimmerman’s Excavating Victorians (2008) and Adelene Buckland’s Novel Science: Fiction and the Invention of Nineteenth-Century Geology (2013), to explore the rhetorical and narrative strategies of writings in the early earth sciences. It has long been noted that the most institutionally influential early geologists formed a cohort of eager young men who, having no tangible interests in the economic and practical applications of their chosen field, were in a position to develop a passionately Romantic engagement with nature, espousing an apocalyptic rhetoric of catastrophes past and borrowing epic imagery from Milton and Dante (Buckland 9, 14-15). However, as Buckland further notes, this argument – though persuasive as far as it goes – fails to take into account the broad social range of participants in the construction of early geological knowledge.
  • Mister Mary Somerville: Husband and Secretary

    Mister Mary Somerville: Husband and Secretary

    Open Research Online The Open University’s repository of research publications and other research outputs Mister Mary Somerville: Husband and Secretary Journal Item How to cite: Stenhouse, Brigitte (2020). Mister Mary Somerville: Husband and Secretary. The Mathematical Intelligencer (Early Access). For guidance on citations see FAQs. c 2020 The Author https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Version: Version of Record Link(s) to article on publisher’s website: http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1007/s00283-020-09998-6 Copyright and Moral Rights for the articles on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. For more information on Open Research Online’s data policy on reuse of materials please consult the policies page. oro.open.ac.uk Mister Mary Somerville: Husband and Secretary BRIGITTE STENHOUSE ary Somerville’s life as a mathematician and mathematician). Although no scientific learned society had a savant in nineteenth-century Great Britain was formal statute barring women during Somerville’s lifetime, MM heavily influenced by her gender; as a woman, there was nonetheless a great reluctance even toallow women her access to the ideas and resources developed and into the buildings, never mind to endow them with the rights circulated in universities and scientific societies was highly of members. Except for the visit of the prolific author Margaret restricted. However, her engagement with learned institu- Cavendish in 1667, the Royal Society of London did not invite tions was by no means nonexistent, and although she was women into their hallowed halls until 1876, with the com- 90 before being elected a full member of any society mencement of their second conversazione [15, 163], which (Societa` Geografica Italiana, 1870), Somerville (Figure 1) women were permitted to attend.1 As late as 1886, on the nevertheless benefited from the resources and social nomination of Isis Pogson as a fellow, the Council of the Royal networks cultivated by such institutions from as early as Astronomical Society chose to interpret their constitution as 1812.
  • The Wyley History of the Geologists' Association in the 50 Years 1958

    The Wyley History of the Geologists' Association in the 50 Years 1958

    THE WYLEY HISTORY OF THE GEOLOGISTS’ ASSOCIATION 1958–2008 Leake, Bishop & Howarth ASSOCIATION THE GEOLOGISTS’ OF HISTORY WYLEY THE The Wyley History of the Geologists’ Association in the 50 years 1958–2008 by Bernard Elgey Leake, Arthur Clive Bishop ISBN 978-0900717-71-0 and Richard John Howarth 9 780900 717710 GAHistory_cover_A5red.indd 1 19/08/2013 16:12 The Geologists’ Association, founded in 1858, exists to foster the progress and Bernard Elgey Leake was Professor of Geology (now Emeritus) in the diffusion of the science of Geology. It holds lecture meetings in London and, via University of Glasgow and Honorary Keeper of the Geological Collections in the Local Groups, throughout England and Wales. It conducts field meetings and Hunterian Museum (1974–97) and is now an Honorary Research Fellow in the School publishes Proceedings, the GA Magazine, Field Guides and Circulars regularly. For of Earth and Ocean Sciences in Cardiff University. He joined the GA in 1970, was further information apply to: Treasurer from 1997–2009 and is now an Honorary Life Member. He was the last The Executive Secretary, sole editor of the Journal of the Geological Society (1972–4); Treasurer (1981–5; Geologists’ Association, 1989–1996) and President (1986–8) of the Geological Society and President of the Burlington House, Mineralogical Society (1998–2000). He is a petrologist, geochemist, mineralogist, Piccadilly, a life-long mapper of the geology of Connemara, Ireland and a Fellow of the London W1J 0DU Royal Society of Edinburgh. He has held research Fellowships in the Universities of phone: 020 74349298 Liverpool (1955–7), Western Australia (1985) and Canterbury, NZ (1999) and a e-mail: [email protected] lectureship and Readership at the University of Bristol (1957–74).
  • Autobiography of Sir George Biddell Airy by George Biddell Airy 1

    Autobiography of Sir George Biddell Airy by George Biddell Airy 1

    Autobiography of Sir George Biddell Airy by George Biddell Airy 1 CHAPTER I. CHAPTER II. CHAPTER III. CHAPTER IV. CHAPTER V. CHAPTER VI. CHAPTER VII. CHAPTER VIII. CHAPTER IX. CHAPTER X. CHAPTER I. CHAPTER II. CHAPTER III. CHAPTER IV. CHAPTER V. CHAPTER VI. CHAPTER VII. CHAPTER VIII. CHAPTER IX. CHAPTER X. Autobiography of Sir George Biddell Airy by George Biddell Airy The Project Gutenberg EBook of Autobiography of Sir George Biddell Airy by George Biddell Airy This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg Autobiography of Sir George Biddell Airy by George Biddell Airy 2 License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net Title: Autobiography of Sir George Biddell Airy Author: George Biddell Airy Release Date: January 9, 2004 [EBook #10655] Language: English Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 *** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SIR GEORGE AIRY *** Produced by Joseph Myers and PG Distributed Proofreaders AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF SIR GEORGE BIDDELL AIRY, K.C.B., M.A., LL.D., D.C.L., F.R.S., F.R.A.S., HONORARY FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, ASTRONOMER ROYAL FROM 1836 TO 1881. EDITED BY WILFRID AIRY, B.A., M.Inst.C.E. 1896 PREFACE. The life of Airy was essentially that of a hard-working, business man, and differed from that of other hard-working people only in the quality and variety of his work. It was not an exciting life, but it was full of interest, and his work brought him into close relations with many scientific men, and with many men high in the State.
  • Persp V1n2 Final4pdf

    Persp V1n2 Final4pdf

    MODERN SCIENCE AND THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH Brian Tonks—Department of Physics have pondered the question, “What is truth?” for many years. My I intellectual journey has convinced me that truth comes in many ways through a variety of sources. I began my schooling believing that scientists were searching for the truth, but my undergraduate training included classes in the history and philosophy of science that disillusioned me towards the scientific process. Then my service in the United States Navy showed me the practical utility of scientific principles, and my graduate studies provided real experience in how science really works. For five years I was involved in nearly all facets of the scientific process. My adult life spans the period of the Voyager missions to the outer planets, the Viking, Pathfinder, and Global Surveyor missions to Mars, and the Pioneer and Magellan missions to Venus. These missions demonstrated the power of scientific observation. Before Voyager, we knew little about the outer planets and even less about their satellites. Even in the largest ground-based telescopes, these appeared as mere pinpoints of light. Voyager revealed them as real worlds with actual, albeit bizarre, geology. Years of speculation were dispelled in a relative moment, reminding me of the Prophet Joseph Smith’s state- ment, “Could you gaze into heaven five minutes, you would know more than you would by reading all that was written on the subject” (History I have come full of the Church, 6:50). I have come full circle, believing today that science is an important source of truth.
  • Further Reading: Michael Faraday

    Further Reading: Michael Faraday

    Further Reading: Michael Faraday General reading Geoffrey Cantor, Michael Faraday: Sandemanian and Scientist. A Study of Science and Religion in the Nineteenth Century, (London, 1991). David Gooding, Experiment and the Making of Meaning: Human Agency in Scientific Observation and Experiment, (Dordrecht, 1991). David Gooding and Frank A.J.L. James (eds.), Faraday Rediscovered: Essays on the Life and Work of Michael Faraday, 1791‐1867, (London, 1985). Frank A.J.L. James (ed.), ‘The Common Purposes of Life’: Science and society at the Royal Institution of Great Britain, (Aldershot, 2002). Frank A.J.L. James, Michael Faraday: A very short Introduction. (Oxford, 2010) Alan E. Jeffreys, Michael Faraday: A List of His Lectures and Published Writings, (London, 1960). Published books by Faraday, mainly collections of papers and lecture notes, some published after his death: Chemical Manipulation, Being Instructions to Students in Chemistry. (1827). Experimental Researches in Electricity, Vol I, II& III (1837, 1844, 1855) Experimental Researches in Chemistry and Physics (1859). W. Crookes. ed. A Course of six lectures on the Various Forces of Matter (1860) W. Crookes. ed. A Course of six lectures on the Chemical History of a Candle, (1861) W. Crookes. ed. On the Various Forces in Nature. (1873) The liquefaction of gases (1896.) Published texts by Faraday The vast majority of Faraday’s manuscripts, apart from letters, have been published on microfilm and cd. Frank A.J.L. James, Guide to the Microfilm edition of the Manuscripts of Michael Faraday (1791‐1867) from the Collections of the Royal Institution, The Institution of Electrical Engineers, The Guildhall Library [and] The Royal Society, (2nd ed., Wakefield, 2001).
  • Mary Anning of Lyme Regis: 19Th Century Pioneer in British Palaeontology

    Mary Anning of Lyme Regis: 19Th Century Pioneer in British Palaeontology

    Headwaters Volume 26 Article 14 2009 Mary Anning of Lyme Regis: 19th Century Pioneer in British Palaeontology Larry E. Davis College of St. Benedict / St. John's University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.csbsju.edu/headwaters Part of the Geology Commons, and the Paleontology Commons Recommended Citation Davis, Larry E. (2009) "Mary Anning of Lyme Regis: 19th Century Pioneer in British Palaeontology," Headwaters: Vol. 26, 96-126. Available at: https://digitalcommons.csbsju.edu/headwaters/vol26/iss1/14 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@CSB/SJU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Headwaters by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@CSB/SJU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LARRY E. DAVIS Mary Anning of Lyme Regis 19th Century Pioneer in British Palaeontology Ludwig Leichhardt, a 19th century German explorer noted in a letter, “… we had the pleasure of making the acquaintance of the Princess of Palaeontology, Miss Anning. She is a strong, energetic spinster of about 28 years of age, tanned and masculine in expression …” (Aurousseau, 1968). Gideon Mantell, a 19th century British palaeontologist, made a less flattering remark when he wrote in his journal, “… sallied out in quest of Mary An- ning, the geological lioness … we found her in a little dirt shop with hundreds of specimens piled around her in the greatest disorder. She, the presiding Deity, a prim, pedantic vinegar looking female; shred, and rather satirical in her conversation” (Curwin, 1940). Who was Mary Anning, this Princess of Palaeontology and Geological Lioness (Fig.
  • The Critique of the Principle of Uniformitarianism and the Analysis

    The Critique of the Principle of Uniformitarianism and the Analysis

    The Critique ofthe Principle ofUniformitarianism and the Analysis of High School Earth Science Textbooks Ho Jang Song and Hui Soo An Department ojEarth Science Education, Seoul National University Although uniformitarianism is widely recognized as the basic principle upon which the structure of historical geology has been erected, a closer investigation on the basis of present scientific knowledge and the philosophy of science reveals some of its invalid aspects. The concept of uniformitarianism wasdeveloped in a dual concept in Lyellian days. Substantive uniformitarianism (a testable theory of geologic change postulating uniformity of rates or material conditions) is false, ambiguous and stifling to hypotheses formation. Methodological uniformitarianism (a procedural principle asserting that former changes of the Earth's surface may be explained by reference to causes now in operation) belongs to the defmition of science and is not unique to geology. Moreover, it also has some methodological defects in forming bold and novel working hypotheses. Methodological uniformitarianism today should take the form of a much older and more general scientific principle: Occam's Razor, the principle of simplicity. Accordingly, substantive uniformitarianism, an incorrect theory, should be abandoned. Methodological uniformi­ tarianism, now a superfluous term, should be best confined to the historical roles in geology. In this connection, the presentation of uniformitarianism in high school textbooks was analyzed. It was revealed that text books were riddled with false and misleading statements as to what uniformi­ tarianism means. Since uniformitarianism, as presented in many textbooks, is in direct contradiction to the philosophy of Inquiry learning, it is important to rethink the direction of uniformitarianism presentation in Earth Science curriculum development.
  • Archibald Geikie (1835–1924): a Pioneer Scottish Geologist, Teacher, and Writer

    Archibald Geikie (1835–1924): a Pioneer Scottish Geologist, Teacher, and Writer

    ROCK STARS Archibald Geikie (1835–1924): A Pioneer Scottish Geologist, Teacher, and Writer Rasoul Sorkhabi, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108, USA; [email protected] years later, but there he learned how to write reports. Meanwhile, he read every geology book he could find, including John Playfair’s Illustrations of the Huttonian Theory, Henry de la Beche’s Geological Manual, Charles Lyell’s Principles of Geology, and Hugh Miller’s The Old Red Sandstone. BECOMING A GEOLOGIST In the summer of 1851, while the Great Exhibition in London was attracting so many people, Geikie decided instead to visit the Island of Arran in the Clyde estuary and study its geology, aided by a brief report by Andrew Ramsay of the British Geological Survey. Geikie came back with a report titled “Three weeks in Arran by a young geologist,” published that year in the Edinburgh News. This report impressed Hugh Miller so much that the renowned geologist invited its young author to discuss geology over a cup of tea. Miller became Geikie’s first mentor. In this period, Geikie became acquainted with local scientists and pri- vately studied chemistry, mineralogy, and geology under Scottish naturalists, such as George Wilson, Robert Chambers, John Fleming, James Forbes, and Andrew Ramsay—to whom he con- fessed his desire to join the Geological Survey. In 1853, Geikie visited the islands of Skye and Pabba off the coast Figure 1. Archibald Geikie as a young geolo- of Scotland and reported his observations of rich geology, including gist in Edinburgh. (Photo courtesy of the British Geological Survey, probably taken in finds of Liassic fossils.
  • Contrastive Empiricism

    Contrastive Empiricism

    Elliott Sober Contrastive Empiricism I Despite what Hegel may have said, syntheses have not been very successful in philosophical theorizing. Typically, what happens when you combine a thesis and an antithesis is that you get a mishmash, or maybe just a contradiction. For example, in the philosophy of mathematics, formalism says that mathematical truths are true in virtue of the way we manipulate symbols. Mathematical Platonism, on the other hand, holds that mathematical statements are made true by abstract objects that exist outside of space and time. What would a synthesis of these positions look like? Marks on paper are one thing, Platonic forms an­ other. Compromise may be a good idea in politics, but it looks like a bad one in philosophy. With some trepidation, I propose in this paper to go against this sound advice. Realism and empiricism have always been contradictory tendencies in the philos­ ophy of science. The view I will sketch is a synthesis, which I call Contrastive Empiricism. Realism and empiricism are incompatible, so a synthesis that merely conjoined them would be a contradiction. Rather, I propose to isolate important elements in each and show that they combine harmoniously. I will leave behind what I regard as confusions and excesses. The result, I hope, will be neither con­ tradiction nor mishmash. II Empiricism is fundamentally a thesis about experience. It has two parts. First, there is the idea that experience is necessary. Second, there is the thesis that ex­ perience suffices. Necessary and sufficient for what? Usually this blank is filled in with something like: knowledge of the world outside the mind.
  • Herschel, Humboldt and Imperial Science

    Herschel, Humboldt and Imperial Science

    CHAPTER 41 Herschel, Humboldt and Imperial Science Christopher Carter In science, the nineteenth century is known as the beginning of a systematic approach to geophysics, an age when terrestrial magnetism, meteorology and other worldwide phenomena were studied for the first time on a large scale. International efforts to study the earth’s climate, tides and magnetic field became common in the first half of this century, in large part because of the impetus given to the field by the work of Alexander von Humboldt. Due to Humboldt’s influence, a system of geomagnetic observatories soon covered most of the European continent.1 But one prominent nation remained outside of this system of observations. Despite Britain’s inherent interest in geomag- netic studies (due to its maritime concerns) the laissez-faire attitudes of the British political system weakened efforts to subsidize state funded scientific projects. Not until the 1830s did Britain join with other European nations in the geophysical arena. This cooperation was beneficial to the science, as it brought not only Britain’s considerable scientific resources to bear on the problem, but it also opened up Britain’s imperial holdings as new stations to expand the observational system. Humboldt’s 1836 letter to the Duke of Sussex (President of the Royal Society), suggesting the establishment of geomagnetic observatories in Brit- ish colonies, provides an initial point of reference for our investigations.2 However, while welcomed by the scientific community, Humboldt’s appeal 1. By 1835, continental geomagnetic stations were operating at Altona, Augsburg, Berlin, Breda, Breslau, Copenhagen, Freiburg, Goettingen, Hanover, Leipzig, Marburg, Milan, Munich, St.
  • 1 1 Catastrophism, Uniformitarianism, and a Scientific

    1 1 Catastrophism, Uniformitarianism, and a Scientific

    1 Catastrophism, Uniformitarianism, and a Scientific Realism Debate That Makes a Difference P. Kyle Stanford ([email protected]) Department of Logic and Philosophy of Science UC Irvine Abstract Some scientific realists suggest that scientific communities have improved in their ability to discover alternative theoretical possibilities and that the problem of unconceived alternatives therefore poses a less significant threat to contemporary scientific communities than it did to their historical predecessors. I first argue that the most profound and fundamental historical transformations of the scientific enterprise have actually increased rather than decreased our vulnerability to the problem. I then argue that whether we are troubled by even the prospect of increasing theoretical conservatism in science should depend on the position we occupy in the ongoing debate concerning scientific realism itself. Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge useful discussions concerning the material in this paper with Kevin Zollman, Penelope Maddy, Jeff Barrett, Pat Forber, Peter Godfrey-Smith, Steve Shapin, Fred Kronz, John Norton, Michael Weisberg, Jane Maienschein, Julia Bursten, Carole Lee, and Arash Pessian, as well as audiences at the Durham University Conference on Unconceived Alternatives and Scientific Realism, the University of Vienna’s (Un)Conceived Alternatives Symposium, the University of Pittsburgh’s Conference on Choosing the Future of Science, Lingnan University’s ‘Science: The Real Thing?’ Conference, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Cambridge University, the University of Vienna, the University of Pennsylvania, UC San Diego, the University of Washington, the University of Western Ontario, the Pittsburgh Center for the Philosophy of Science, Washington University in St. Louis, Bloomsburg University, Indiana University, the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, and the Australian National University.