Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:38:19.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Scientific Realism and the Divide et Impera Strategy: The Ether Saga Revisited

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Alberto Cordero
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Using the optical ether as a case study, this article advances four lines of consideration to show why synchronic versions of the divide et impera strategy of scientific realism are unlikely to work. The considerations draw from (a) the nineteenth-century theories of light, (b) the rise of surprising implication as an epistemic value from the time of Fresnel on, (c) assessments of the ether in end-of-century reports around 1900, and (d) the roots of ether theorizing in now superseded metaphysical assumptions. The typicality of the case and its impact on diachronic versions of the strategy are briefly discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 78 , Issue 5 , December 2011 , pp. 1120 - 1130
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 wish to thank Roman Frigg, the Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science at LSE-London, and the audience at the December 2009 meeting of the Sigma Club for comments on an ancestor to this article.

References

Bain, Jonathan, and Norton, John. 2004. “What Should Philosophers of Science Learn from the History of the Electron?” In Histories of the Electron, ed. Buchwald, J. Z. and Warwick, A., 451–65. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Buchwald, Jed Z. 1989. The Rise of the Wave Theory of Light. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Carrier, M. 2004. “Experimental Success and the Revelation of Reality: The Miracle Argument for Scientific Realism.” In Knowledge and the World, ed. Carrier, M. et al., 137–62. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Carrier, M.. 2007. A Metaphysics for Realism: Knowing the Unobservable. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chakravartty, Anjan. 2003. “The Structuralist Conception of Objects.” Philosophy of Science 70:867–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakravartty, Anjan. 2007. A Metaphysics for Realism: Knowing the Unobservable. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, Hasok. 2003. “Preservative Realism and Its Discontents: Revisiting Caloric.” Philosophy of Science 70:902–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einstein, Albert. 1920. “The Ether and the Theory of Relativity.” Address delivered at the University of Leyden, May 5, http://www.zionism-israel.com/Albert_Einstein/Albert_Einstein_Ether_Relativity.htm.Google Scholar
Fleming, J. A. 1902. Waves and Ripples in Water, Air and Aether. New York: Young.Google Scholar
Fresnel, Augustin Jean. 1821/1868. Premiere Memoire sur la double refraction. In Ouvres Completes, Vol. 2, ed. Henri Hureau de Senarmont, Emile Verdet, and Leonor Francoise Fresnel, 261–442. Paris: Ministere de l'Education Publique. Digital edition sponsored by the University of Toronto, http://www.archive.org/details/oeuvrescomplte02fresuoft.Google Scholar
Fresnel, Augustin Jean. 1822/1868. Second Memoire sur la double refraction. In Ouvres Completes, Vol. 2, ed. Henri Hureau de Senarmont, Emile Verdet, and Leonor Francoise Fresnel, 479–596. Paris: Ministere de l'Education Publique. Digital edition sponsored by the University of Toronto, http://www.archive.org/details/oeuvrescomplte02fresuoft.Google Scholar
Ganot, Adolphe. 1860/1893. Elementary Treatise on Physics. Trans. Atkinson, E.. New York: Wood.Google Scholar
Helmholtz, Hermann von. 1899. “Preface.” In The Principles of Mechanics Presented in a New Form, by Heinrich Hertz, trans. D. Jones and J. T. Wally. London: Macmillian, http://www.archive.org/stream/principlesofmech00hertuoft#page/n7/mode/2up/search/light+waves+consist+of+electric+vibrations.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Philip. 1993. The Advancement of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Laudan, Larry. 1981. “A Confutation of Convergent Realism.” Philosophy of Science 48:19–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leplin, Jarrett. 1997. A Novel Defense of Scientific Realism. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lodge, Oliver J. 1919. “Aether and Matter.” Nature 104:15–19.Google Scholar
Lodge, Oliver J.. 1921. “Speech through the Aether.” Nature 108:88–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovering, Joseph. 1874. “Mathematical and Philosophical State of the Physical Sciences.” American Journal of Science 8:297–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, Timothy D. 2006. “Scientific Realism and the Stratagema de Divide et Impera.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57:537–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendenhall, T. C. 1901. “Progress in Physics in the Nineteenth Century.” Annual report, 1900, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Michelson, Albert A. 1903. Light Waves and Their Uses. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Michelson, Albert A., and Morley, Edward. 1886. “Influence of Motion of the Medium on the Velocity of Light.” American Journal of Science 31:377–86.Google Scholar
Psillos, Stathis. 1999. Scientific Realism: How Science Tracks Truth. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Swenson, Loyd S. Jr. 1972. The Aetherial Ether. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, Silvanus P. 1910. The Life of William Thomson, Baron Kelvin of Largs. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Thomson, J. Arthur. 1903/1906. Progress of Science in the Century. The Nineteenth Century Series 25, chap. 5. London: Chambers.Google Scholar
Thomson, William. 1884. “Notes of Lectures on Molecular Dynamics and the Wave Theory of Light.” Papyrograph reproduction, Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar
Thomson, William. 1889. Popular Lectures and Addresses. Vol. 1, 2nd ed. Nature Series. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Whewell, William. 1847. The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, Founded upon Their History. Pt. 2. London: Parker.Google Scholar
Whittaker, E. T. 1953/2007. A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity: From the Age of Descartes to the Close of the Nineteenth Century (1910). Whitefish, MT: Kessinger.Google Scholar
Williams, Henry Smith. 1901/2007. The Story of Nineteenth-Century Science. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Worrall, J. 1989a. “Fresnel, Poisson and the White Spot: The Role of Successful Prediction in the Acceptance of Scientific Theories.” In The Uses of Experiment, ed. Gooding, G. et al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Worrall, J.. 1989b. “Structural Realism: The Best of Both Worlds?” Dialectica 43:99–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar