Book contents
- Interpreting Mach
- Interpreting Mach
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- 1 Ernst Mach’s Piano and the Making of a Psychophysical Imaginarium
- 2 Mother’s Milk and More
- 3 Meaningful Work
- 4 Mach on Analogy in Science
- 5 Ernst Mach’s Enlightenment Pragmatism
- 6 On the Philosophical and Scientific Relationship between Ernst Mach and William James
- 7 Ernst Mach and Friedrich Nietzsche
- 8 Abstraction, Pragmatism, and History in Mach’s Economy of Science
- 9 Holding the Hand of History
- 10 Ernst Mach and the Vienna Circle
- 11 Narratives Divided
- 12 Phenomenalism, or Neutral Monism, in Mach’s Analysis of Sensations?
- 13 The Case for Mach’s Neutral Monism
- Index
- References
5 - Ernst Mach’s Enlightenment Pragmatism
History and Economy in Scientific Cognition
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 March 2021
By
Edited by
Book contents
- Interpreting Mach
- Interpreting Mach
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- 1 Ernst Mach’s Piano and the Making of a Psychophysical Imaginarium
- 2 Mother’s Milk and More
- 3 Meaningful Work
- 4 Mach on Analogy in Science
- 5 Ernst Mach’s Enlightenment Pragmatism
- 6 On the Philosophical and Scientific Relationship between Ernst Mach and William James
- 7 Ernst Mach and Friedrich Nietzsche
- 8 Abstraction, Pragmatism, and History in Mach’s Economy of Science
- 9 Holding the Hand of History
- 10 Ernst Mach and the Vienna Circle
- 11 Narratives Divided
- 12 Phenomenalism, or Neutral Monism, in Mach’s Analysis of Sensations?
- 13 The Case for Mach’s Neutral Monism
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter explores Ernst Mach’s philosophy of scientific knowledge as an original form of pragmatism. Mach recognised science as a deeply historical phenomenon and scientific knowledge as path-dependent, thoroughly fallible, and far from ever closed. Conceptual perplexities, he held, can only be resolved by historical-comparative investigations. What merits thinking of Mach as a pragmatist, I will argue, is his insistence, as a philosopher, on the ultimately practical orientation of all thought as a matter both of fact and norm, and, as a historian of science, on the need to investigate the specific problem situations out of and in response to which concepts and theories developed. Last but not least, the practical orientation of his philosophy found expression in his allegiance to the ideal of enlightenment.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Interpreting MachCritical Essays, pp. 84 - 102Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Banks, Erik C. 2014. The Realistic Empiricism of Mach, James and Russell: Neutral Monism Reconceived. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackmore, John T. (ed.) 1992. Ernst Mach – A Deeper Look: Documents and New Perspectives. Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf 1963. ‘Intellectual Autobiography’, in Schilpp, P. A. (ed.), The Philosophy of Rudolf Carnap. Open Court, pp. 3–84.Google Scholar
Feigl, Herbert 1949. ‘Naturalism and Humanism: An Essay on Some Issues of General Education and a Critique of Current Misconceptions Regarding Scientific Method and The Scientific Outlook in Philosophy,’ American Quarterly 1: 135–148. Reprinted in H. Feigl and M. Brodbeck (eds.), Readings in the Philosophy of Science. Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1953, pp. 8–18.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, Paul K. 1970. ‘Philosophy of Science: A Subject with a Great Past’, in Stuewer, R. (ed.), Historical and Philosophical Perspectives of Science. University of Minnesota Press, pp. 172–183.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, Paul K. 1984. ‘Mach’s Theory of Research and Its Relation to Einstein’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 15: 1–22.Google Scholar
Frank, Philipp 1917. ‘Die Bedeutung der physikalischen Erkenntnistheorie Ernst Machs für das Geisteslebens unserer Zeit’, Die Naturwissenschaften 5: 65–80. Translated as ‘The Importance for our Times of Ernst Mach’s Philosophy of Science’, in Frank’s Modern Science and its Philosophy. Harvard University Press, 1949, pp. 61–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haller, Rudolf 1980. ‘Poetische Phantasie und Sparsamkeit. Ernst Mach als Wissenschaftstheoretiker’, in Festkolloquium am 12. November 1979: 20 Jahre Ernst-Mach-Institut 1959–1979, Freiburg, pp. 20–48. Translated as ‘Poetic Imagination and Economy. Ernst Mach as Theorist of Science’, in J. Agassi and R. S. Cohen (eds.), Scientific Philosophy Today. D. Reidel, 1981, pp. 71–84, and in John T. Blackmore, (ed.) 1992. Ernst Mach – A Deeper Look: Documents and New Perspectives. Kluwer, pp. 215–228.Google Scholar
Haller, Rudolf 1988. ‘Grundzüge der Machschen Philosophie’, in Haller, R. and Stadler, F. (eds.), Ernst Mach. Werk und Wirkung. Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky, pp. 64–86.Google Scholar
Hiebert, Erwin N. 1970. ‘Mach’s Philosophical Use of the History of Science’, in Stuewer, R. (ed.), Historical and Philosophical Perspectives of Science. University of Minnesota Press, pp. 184–203.Google Scholar
Hookway, Christopher 2008. ‘Pragmatism’, The Stanford Online Encyclopedia of Philosophy, updated 2013. Available from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatism/Google Scholar
Horkheimer, Max and Adorno, Theodor 1947. Dialektik der Aufklärung. Querido. Translated as The Dialectic of Enlightenment. Stanford University Press, 2007.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel 1784. ‘Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung?’, Berlinische Monatsschrift 2: 481–494. Translated as ‘An Answer to the Question: “What is Enlightenment?”’, in I. Kant, An Answer to the Question: ʻWhat is Enlightenment?’ Penguin, 2009, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
James, William 1898. ‘Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results’, The Univeristy Chronicle (Berkeley, California). Reprinted in W. P. Alston and G. Nakhnikian (eds.) Readings in Twentieth-Century Philosophy. The Free Press, 1963, pp. 12–25.Google Scholar
James, William 1907. Pragmatism. A New Name for some Old Ways of Thinking. Longmans, Green & Co. Reprinted, Prometheus, 1991.Google Scholar
Lübbe, Hermann 1972. ‘Positivismus und Phänomenologie: Mach und Husserl’, in Bewuβtsein in Geschichten. Studien zur Phänomenologie der Subjektivität: Mach-Husserl-Schapp-Wittgenstein. Rombach, pp. 33–62. Translated as ‘Positivism and Phenomenology: Mach and Husserl’, in T. Luckmann (ed.), Phenomenology and Sociology. Penguin, 1978, pp. 119–141.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst 1872. Die Geschichte und die Wurzel des Satzes von der Erhaltung der Arbeit. Reprinted, J. A. Barth, 1909. Translated as History and Root of the Principle of the Conservation of Energy. Open Court, 1911.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst 1882. Die ökonomische Natur der physikalischen Forschung. Translated as ‘The Economical Nature of Physical Inquiry’, in Mach, Ernst, 1898. Popular Scientific Lectures, 3rd edn. Open Court. Reprinted 1986, pp. 186–213.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst 1883. Die Mechanik in ihrer Entwicklung historisch-kritisch dargestellt, 9th edn. Brockhaus. Translated as The Science of Mechanics: A Critical and Historical Account of its Development. Open Court, 1960.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst 1884. Über Umbildung und Anpassung im natutrwissenschaftlichen Denken. Translated as ‘On Transformation and Adaptation in Scientific Thought’, in Ernst Mach, 1898. Popular Scientific Lectures, 3rd edn. Open Court. Reprinted 1986, pp. 214–235.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst 1886. Beiträge zur Analyse der Empfindungen. Fischer. Translated as Contributions to the Analysis of Sensations. Open Court, 1897.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst 1896. Die Prinzipien der Wärmelehre, 2nd edn. J. A. Barth. Translated as Principles of the Theory of Heat. D. Reidel, 1986.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst 1905. Erkenntnis und Irrtum. J. A. Barth. Translated as Knowledge and Error. D. Reidel, 1976.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst 1907. Die Rassenfrage. Neue Freie Presse. Reprinted in K. D. Heller (ed.), Ernst Mach: Wegbereiter der modernen Physik. Springer, 1964, pp. 98–102.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst 1910a. ‘Die Leitgedanken meiner naturwissenschaftlichen Erkenntnislehre und ihre Aufnahme durch die Zeitgenossen,’ Scientia 7: 225–240 and Physikalische Zeitschrift 11: 599–606. Reprinted in L. Mach (ed.), Die Leitgedanken meiner naturwissenschaftlichen Erkenntnislehre und ihre Aufnahme durch die Zeitgenossen. Sinnliche Elemente und naturwissenschaftliche Begriffe. Zwei Aufsätze von Ernst Mach. J. A. Barth, pp. 3–18. Excerpts translated as ‘The Leading Thoughts of My Scientific Epistemology and Its Acceptance by Contemporaries’, in John T. Blackmore (ed.), Ernst Mach – A Deeper Look: Documents and New Perspectives. Kluwer, 1992, pp. 133–139.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst 1910b. Populär-wissenschaftliche Vorlesungen, 4th edn. J. A.Barth. Reprint of 5th edn, Xenomoi, 2014.Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1877. ‘The Fixation of Belief’, Popular Science Monthly 12: 1–16. Reprinted in Charles S. Peirce, Chance, Love and Logic. Philosophical Essays (ed. M. R. Cohen). Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1923, pp. 7–31.Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1878. ‘How to Make Our Ideas Clear’, Popular Science Monthly 12: 286-303. Reprinted in Charles S. Peirce, Chance, Love and Logic. Philosophical Essays (ed. M. R. Cohen). Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1923, pp. 32–60.Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1904. ‘Comte’s Philosophy. Review of The Philosophy of Auguste Comte by L. Levy-Bruhl’, The Nation, 28 April 1904.Google Scholar
Pojman, Paul 2009. ‘Ernst Mach’, The Stanford Online Encyclopedia of Philosophy, updated 2018. Available from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ernst-mach/Google Scholar
Putnam, Hilary 1994. ‘Pragmatism and Moral Objectivity’, in his Words and Life (ed. Conant, J.). Harvard University Press, pp. 151–181.Google Scholar
Uebel, Thomas 1996. ‘On Neurath’s Boat’, in Cartwright, N., Cat, J., Fleck, L., and Uebel, T., Otto Neurath: Philosophy Between Science and Politics. Cambridge University Press, pp. 89–166.Google Scholar
Uebel, Thomas 2003. ‘History of Philosophy of Science and the Politics of Race and Ethnic Exclusion’, in Stadler, F. and Heidelberger, M. (eds.), Wissenschaftsphilosophie und Politik/Philosophy of Science and Politics. Springer, pp. 91–117.Google Scholar
von Mises, Richard 1938. Ernst Mach und die empiristische Wissenschaftsauffassung. Zu Ernst Machs 100. Geburtstag am 18. Februar 1838. Van Stockum. Translated as ‘Ernst Mach and the Empiricist Conception of Science’, in R. S. Cohen and R. J. Seeger (eds.), Ernst Mach: Physicist and Philosopher. D. Reidel, 1970, pp. 245–270.Google Scholar
- 4
- Cited by