Samuel duclos’ critique of robert boyle’s corpuscular philosophy: a controversy about the concept of ‘chemistry‘

• Authors: Dariusz Kucharski

Abstracts

EN

The seventeenth century witnessed the transition from qualitative to quantitative physics. The very process was not easy and obvious and it consisted of discussions in many fields. One of them was the question about the nature of chemistry which was at the time undergoing some changes towards the form we know now. The main argument concerned the explanatory principles one should invoke to understand properly certain outcomes of chemical experiments. The present paper is a presentation of such an (indirect) argument between R. Boyle, a prominent proponent of corpuscular, quantitative principles and S. Duclos, an al-chymist and a proponent of paracelsian, qualitative ones. What is interesting, Duclos knew The Sceptical Chymist, Boyle’s main work which contained a severe critique of paracelsian chemistry, and a%empted to point out some weaknesses of Boyle’s own position. Duclos scrutinized Boyle’s experiments described in his Certain Physiological Essays and other works and argued for certain shortcomings of Boyle’s laboratory skills, his failure to indicate some literature sources and, first of all, insufficiency of Boyle’s arguments for the corpuscular thesis. According to Duclos, Boyle did not follow in laboratory certain procedures recommended by himself, using unclear notions and applying the corpuscular principles without proper justification. What is more, Duclos argued also in favour of paracelsian chymistry presenting some qualitative explanations in experiments in which Boyle failed to give quantitative ones. Knowing the further development of natural philosophy, it seems interesting to realize how complex it was. The present paper shows also how much irremovable from scientific research is the theoretical component.

Keywords

EN

Boyle; Duclos; theory of matter; chemistry; experimental method

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Kardynała Stefana Wyszyńskiego w Warszawie
• Journal: Studia Philosophiae Christianae
• Year: 2020
• Volume: 56
• Issue: S1
• Pages: 26-39

Dates

published

2020

Contributors

author

Dariusz Kucharski

• Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw, Institute of Philosophy

• https://orcid.org/0000000341361745

References

• Anstey P. R., Experimental versus speculative natural philosophy, in: The Science of Nature in the Seventeenth Century, eds. P. R. Anstey, J. A. Schuster, Springer, Dordrecht 2005, 215-242.
• Boantza V. D., Alkahest and Fire: Debating Matter, Chymistry and Natural History at the Early Parisian Academy of Sciences, in: The Body as Object and Instrument of Knowledge. Embodied Empiricism in Early Modern Science, eds. C. Wolfe, O. Gal, Springer, Dordrecht 2010, 75-92.
• Boantza V. D., Chemical Philosophy and Boyle’s Incongruous Philosophical Chymistry, in: Science in the Age of Baroque, eds. O. Gal, R. Chen-Morris, Springer, Dordrecht 2013, 257-283.
• Boyle R., Certain Physiological Essays, (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/a28944.0001.001/2:A28944.0001.001?page=root;size=125;vid=63094;view=text), [accessed on: 08/2015].
• Boyle R., Origins of Forms and Qualities, in: The Works of Robert Boyle, eds. M. Hunter, E. Davis, vol. 5, Pickering and Chatto, London 1999-2000.
• Boyle R., The Sceptical Chymist, (http://www.gutenberg.org/%les/22914/22914-h/22914-h.htm), [accessed on: 08/2015].
• Debus A., Chemical Philosophy, Dover Publications, New York 2002.
• Ducheyne S., Joan Baptista van Helmont and the question of experimental modernism, Physis, Rivista Internazionale di Storia della Scienza 42(2005), 305-332.
• Franckowiak R., Du Clos and the Mechanization of Chemical Philosophy, in: The Mechanization of Natural Philosophy, eds. D. Garber, S. Roux, Springer, Dordrecht 2013, 285-301.
• Johnson M., Wilson C., Lucretius and the history of science, in: The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius, eds. S. Gillespie, P. Hardie, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2007, 131-148.
• Meinel C., Early Seventeenth-Century Atomism: Theory, Epistemology, and the Insufficiency of Experiment, Isis 79(1988), 68-104.
• Michael E., Daniel Sennert on Matter and Form. At the Junction of the Old and the New, Early Science and Medicine 2(1997), 272-299.
• Newman W., Principe L., Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of Historiographic Mistake, Early Science and Medicine 3(1998), 32-65.
• Sargent R.-M., Learning from experience: Boyle’s construction of an experimental philosophy, in: Robert Boyle reconsidered, ed. M. Hunter, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1994, 57-78.
• Sargent R.-M., The Diffident Naturalist. Robert Boyle and the Philosophy of Experiment, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago – London 1995.
• Shapin S., Schaffer S., Leviathan and the air-pump. Hobbes, Boyle, and the experimental life, Princeton University Press, Princeton – Guildford 1985.

Identifiers

DOI

10.21697/spch.2020.56.S1.02

Biblioteka Nauki

1070388