A critique of Weisberg’s view on the periodic table and some speculations on the nature of classifications

Foundations of Chemistry 14 (3):275-284 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article carefully analyzes a recent paper by Weisberg in which it is claimed that when Mendeleev discovered the periodic table he was not working as a modeler but instead as a theorist. I argue that Weisberg is mistaken in several respects and that the periodic table should be regarded as a classification, not as a theory. In the second part of the article an attempt is made to elevate the status of classifications by suggesting that they provide a form of ‘side-ways explanation’

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,448

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-07-26

Downloads
54 (#395,228)

6 months
10 (#381,237)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

References found in this work

The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science.Nancy Cartwright - 1999 - New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Who is a Modeler?Michael Weisberg - 2007 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 58 (2):207-233.
The Periodic Table, Its Story and Its Significance.Eric R. Scerri - 2007 - New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The rise and fall of british emergentism.Brian P. Mclaughlin - 1992 - In Ansgar Beckermann, Hans Flohr & Jaegwon Kim (eds.), Emergence or Reduction?: Prospects for Nonreductive Physicalism. New York: De Gruyter. pp. 49-93.

View all 7 references / Add more references