جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « philosophy of chemistry » در نشریات گروه « علوم انسانی »

For a period of about 40 years leading up to 1826, the chemical formula of water was adopted to be HO, in which one atom of Hydrogen and one atom of Oxygen are composed together. In this article, the examples and discussion refer to the chemistry treatise of Dr. Khalil Aʿlam al-Dawlah which was a training resource of newly established academy of Dār al-funūn in Iran, which, according to the scientific belief of that time, the chemical formula of water was introduced as HO. Before than Dār al-funūn, it wasn`t considered any formula for water, but water was one of the four basic elements, according to the Natural Hikma`s point of view. Nowadays chemical formula of water is known as H2O. Although from a presentist point of view, the water formula in that treatise can be described as “wrong” for the time being, whatever in the present article, from the perspective of the philosophy of chemistry, an attempt has been made to show that the sentence is not so easy. The fact that the water formula has been accepted as HO for some time in the past, as a historical experience of science, recommends further reflection on the meaning of correctness or inaccuracy of a scientific proposition, as well as challenging the assurance on theory and the reliance on empirical evidence; because this false statement belonged to a theory that ironically is valid till now, and also had not shown a significant inconsistency with the empirical evidence for a long time. Finally, this paper concluded that assigning an incorrect formula for water over half a century resulted from at least a pair of mistakes that have concealed the matter from the view of experience: supposition of an incorrect principle along with misinterpretation of empirical evidence.

By some standards, chemistry is one of the largest scientific fields in the world, a science that is concerned with the "direct influence of molecules on human life" and thus raises ethical, political, philosophical and epistemological questions. In this article, with the aim of examining the development process of this science from a philosophical and historical perspective, relying on library studies and existing articles, the main issues and trends in the evolution of the philosophical view of this science, and the relationship between the philosophy of chemistry and the philosophy of science, focusing on issues in The philosophy of chemistry that caused major revisions or developments in the philosophy of science was reviewed and evaluated. Studies have shown that until recently, chemistry was practically ignored by professional philosophers of science for various reasons, such as historical neglect of chemistry, reduction of chemistry to physics, and lack of focus on the properties and structure of chemistry, and since the early 1990s, With the social organization formed in it and the expansion of scientific activities increasingly from disciplinary boundaries towards problem-oriented research, the situation changed drastically so that the philosophy of chemistry is currently one of the most flourishing fields in the philosophy of science.

Two concepts that are being considered in Philosophy of Chemistry are Reduction and Emergence. These concepts have a major rule in arguing that special sciences, have kind of independence from physics. After sketching a conceptual framework about the issue, we have had a critical review about Alex Manafu's argument about the rule of chemistry in debate about Reduction and Emergence in Philosophy of Science.He argue that chemistry has some special advantages in study of Reduction and Emergence in Philosophy of Science. we have showed that his argument cannot give us a firm ground for attaching these advantages to Chemistry. We then propose a distinction between Ontological complexity and Epistemological complexity and then show how Manafu's arguments are faulty due to ignoring this distinction