Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Failure of Reduction and How to Resist Disunity of the Sciences in the Context of Chemical Education

  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The failure, by philosophers of science, to reduce special sciences such as chemistry to quantum mechanics has produced many responses including the notion of supervenience and that of the disunity of the sciences. This article criticizes these responses and proposes an alternative one, namely the autonomy of chemistry. After examining the history of the atomic orbital model I argue that chemical educators should legitimately continue to view terms such as orbital and configuration in a realistic manner although they are deemed to be strictly non-referring in quantum mechanics. Such a view of autonomous though related levels is opposed in particular to the increasingly prevalent notion of disunified sciences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Asquith, P. D. & Hacking, I. (eds.): 1978. PSA 1978, Vol. II, Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayala, F. J. & Dobzhasky, T. (eds.): 1974, Studies in the Philosophy of Biology, Macmillan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basolo, F. & Parry, R. W.: 1980, ‘An Approach to Teaching Systematic Inorganic Reaction Chemistry in Beginning Chemistry Courses’, Journal of Chemical Education 57, 772–777.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bent, H. A.: 1963, ‘Tangent-Sphere Models of Molecules I. Theory and Construction’, Journal of Chemical Education 40, 446–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bent, H. A.: 1984, ‘Should Orbitals be X-Rated in Beginning Chemistry Courses?’, Journal of Chemical Education 61, 421–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bent, H. A. & Bent, B. E.: 1987, ‘Descriptive Chemistry’, Journal of Chemical Education 64, 249–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessancon, R. M. (ed.): 1974, The Encyclopedia of Physics, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R.: 1983, ‘On the Current Status of Scientific Realism’, Erkenntnis 19, 45–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohm, H. V. & Tepley, N.: 1974, entry on ‘Fermi Surfaces’ in Bessancon (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Physics, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 332–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D.: 1974, ‘Downward Causation in Hierarchically Organized Systems’, in Ayala & Dobzhasky (eds.), Studies in the Philosophy of Biology, Macmillan, London, 179–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capra, F.: 1974, ‘Bootstrap and Buddhism’, American Journal of Physics 42, 15–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capra, F.: 1976, The Tao of Physics, Fontana, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, N.: 1994, ‘The Metaphysics of the Disunified World’, PSA 1994, Vol. 2, Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, 357–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, N., Cat, J. & Chang, H.: 1996, ‘Otto Neurath: Politics and the Unity of Science’, in Galison and Stump (eds.), Disunity of Science, Boundaries, Contexts, and Power, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, 347–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, N., Cat, J., Fleck, K. & Uebel, T. (eds.): 1997, Between Science and Politics: The Philosophy of Otto Neurath, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, R. S., Hooker, C., Michalos, A. C. & van Evra, J. W. (eds.): 1976, PSA 1974, Proceedings of Philosophy of Science Association, Part II, Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cotton, A. & Wilkinson, D.: 1988, Advanced Inorganic Chemistry, fifth edition, Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darden, L. & Maull, N.: 1977, ‘Interfield Theories’, Philosophy of Science 43, 44–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darden, L. (ed.): PSA 1996, Part II, Symposium papers, Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing.

  • Dupré, J.: 1993, The Disorder of Things, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA and London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fricke, B. & McMinn, J.: 1976, ‘Chemical and Physical Properties of Superheavy Elements’, Naturwissenschaften 63, 162–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, K.: 1982, ‘Is Intertheoretic Reduction Feasible?’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 33, 17–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galison, P.: 1987, How Experiments End, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galison, P. & Stump, D. J. (eds.): 1996, Disunity of Science, Boundaries, Contexts, and Power, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallup, G. A.: 1988, ‘The Lewis Electron-Pair Model, Spectroscopy, and the Role of the Orbital Picture in Describing the Electronic Structure of Molecules’, Journal of Chemical Education 65, 671–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie, R., Spencer, J. & Moog, R.: 1996, ‘Demystifying Introductory Chemistry, Part I, Electronic Configurations from Experiment’, Journal of Chemical Education 73, 617–622.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, I.: 1983, Representing and Intervening, Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilbron, J. L. & Kuhn, T. S.: 1969, ‘The Genesis of the Bohr Atom’, Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 1, 211–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, M.: 1980, ‘Why Should We Teach Descriptive Chemistry?’, Journal of Chemical Education 57, 770–772.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D., Forbes, M. & Burian, R. (eds.): PSA 1994, Vol. I, Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing.

  • Humphreys, P.: 1996, ‘Emergence Not Supervenience’, in L. Darden (ed.), PSA 1996, Part II, Symposium papers, S337-S345, Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemeney, J. & Oppenheim, P.: 1956, ‘On Reduction’, Philosophical Studies 7, 6–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim J.: 1984, ‘Concepts of Supervenience’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 45, 153–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kincaid, H.: 1900, ‘Molecular Biology and the Unity of Science’, Philosophy of Science 57, 575–593.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S.: 1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago, Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laudan, L.: 1981, ‘A Confutation of Convergent Realism’, Philosophy of Science 48, 19–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melrose, M. & Scerri, E. R.: 1996, ‘Why the 4s Orbital Is Occupied Before the 3d?’, Journal of Chemical Education 73, 498–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, E.: 1961, The Structure of Science, Harcourt Brace and World, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nickles, T.: 1975, ‘Two Concepts of Intertheoretic Reduction’, Journal of Philosophy 70, 181–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogilvie, J. F.: 1990, ‘The Nature of the Chemical Bond — 1990’, Journal of Chemical Education 67, 280–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papineau, D.: 1993, Philosophical Naturalism, Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pauling, L.: 1992, ‘The Nature of the Chemical Bond — 1992’, Journal of Chemical Education 69, 519–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pilar, F. L.: 1981, ‘Damn the Permanganate Volcanoes: Full Principles Ahead!’, Journal of Chemical Education 58, 803–803.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouse, J.: 1996, Engaging Science, Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson, R. T.: 1986, ‘Is the Theoretical Emperor Really Wearing Any Clothes?’, Journal of Chemical Education 63, 845–846.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar, S.: 1992, ‘Models of Reduction and Categories of Reductionism’, Synthese 91, 167–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scerri, E. R.: 1991, ‘Electronic Configurations, Quantum Mechanics and Reduction’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 42, 309–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scerri, E. R.: 1992, ‘The Nature of the Chemical Bond — Once More’, Journal of Chemical Education 69, 602–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scerri, E. R.: 1994a, ‘Prediction of the Nature of Hafnium from Chemistry, Bohr's Theory and Quantum Theory’, Annals of Science 51, 137–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scerri, E. R.: 1994b, ‘Has Chemistry Been at Least Approximately Reduced to Quantum Mechanics?’, in D. Hull, M. Forbes & R. Burian (eds.), PSA 1994, East Lansing, Philosophy of Science Association, 160–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scerri, E. R.: 1994c, ‘Plus ça Change’, Chemistry in Britain 30, 379–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scerri, E. R.: 1995, ‘The Exclusion Principle, Chemistry and Hidden Variables’, Synthese 102, 165–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Scerri, E. R. and McIntyre, L.: 1997, ‘The Case for Philosophy of Chemistry’, Synthese 111, 213–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scerri, E. R.: 1998, ‘Popper's Naturalized Approach to the Reduction of Chemistry’, International Studies in Philosophy of Science 12, 33–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffner, K.: 1967, ‘Approaches to Reduction’, Philosophy of Science 34, 137–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffrath, R. E.: 1983, ‘Is “Why” More Important Than “What”?’, Journal of Chemical Education 60, 729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. M. W.: 1992, ‘The Nature of the Chemical Bond — Once More’, Journal of Chemical Education 69, 600–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sklar, L., 1967: ‘Two Types of Inter-Theoretic Reduction’, British Journal for Philosophy of Science 18, 109–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoner, E.: 1924, ‘The Distribution of Electrons Among Atomic Levels’, Philosophical Magazine 6,48, 719.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stump, D.J.: 1996, ‘From Epistemology and Metaphysics to Concrete Connections’, in P. Galison & D. J. Stump (eds.), Disunities of Science, Boundaries, Contexts, and Power, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, 255–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suppes, P.: 1978, ‘The Plurality of Science’, in Asquith & Hacking (eds.), PSA 1978, Vol. II, Philosophy of Science Assocation, East Lansing, 3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, J. J.: 1904, ‘On the Structure of the Atom’, Philosophical Magazine 7, 237–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wimsatt, W. C.: 1976, ‘Reductive Explanation: A Functional Account’, in Cohen, Hooker, Michalos & van Evra (eds.), PSA 1974, Part II, Reidel, Dordrecht, 671–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerman, J. J.: 1986, ‘The Coming Renaissance of Descriptive Inorganic Chemistry’, Journal of Chemical Education 63, 829–833.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zukav, G.: 1979, The Dancing Wu-Li Masters, Fontana/Collins, London.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemistry, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

    Eric R. Scerri

Authors
  1. Eric R. Scerri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scerri, E.R. The Failure of Reduction and How to Resist Disunity of the Sciences in the Context of Chemical Education. Science & Education 9, 405–425 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008719726538

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008719726538

Keywords

Search

Navigation