Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:10:45.819Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experiments and Theory in the Preparative Sciences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

William Goodwin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this essay I consider, by way of the reflections of accomplished synthetic chemists, how the experimental work of the synthetic organic chemist supports the testing, refinement, and creation of theories of organic chemistry. The role of experiments in modern Baconian sciences like organic chemistry is contrasted with their role in fields of more traditional philosophical concern, such as experimental physics.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 79 , Issue 4 , October 2012 , pp. 429 - 447
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

I would like to acknowledge the helpful feedback provided by the participants in PSXII at the University of Konstanz, Germany.

References

Bacon, Francis. 1905. The Philosophical Works of Francis Bacon, ed. Robertson, J. M.. Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries.Google Scholar
Bacon, Francis. 1964. “Thoughts and Conclusions.” In The Philosophy of Francis Bacon, trans. Farrington, Benjamin, 73–102. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Corey, Elias J., and Cheng, Xue-Min. 1989. The Logic of Chemical Synthesis. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Cornforth, John W. 1993. “The Trouble with Synthesis.” Australian Journal of Chemistry 46:157–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, William. 2003. “Explanation in Organic Chemistry.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 988:141–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goodwin, William. 2009a. “Scientific Understanding and Synthetic Design.” British Journal for Philosophy of Science 60:271–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, William. 2009b. “Visual Representations in Science.” Philosophy of Science 76:372–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacking, Ian. 1983. Representing and Intervening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas. 1977. The Essential Tension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas. 1996. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, Wendy S. 2009. “Does Matter Really Matter? Computer Simulations, Experiments, and Materiality.” Synthese 169:483–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schummer, Joachim. 1997. “Challenging Standard Distinctions between Science and Technology: The Case of Preparative Chemistry.” Hyle 3:81–94.Google Scholar
Smit, W. A., Bochkov, A. F., and Caple, R.. 1998. Organic Synthesis: The Science Behind the Art. Cambridge: Royal Society of Chemistry.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiles, J. E. 1993. “Experiment as Intervention.” British Journal for Philosophy of Science 44:463–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, James. 2003. Making Things Happen: A Theory of Causal Explanation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Woodward, Robert B. 1956. “Synthesis.” In Perspectives in Organic Chemistry, ed. Todd, Alexander R.. New York: Interscience.Google Scholar