Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T10:40:26.069Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Mechanisms and Their Explanatory Challenges in Organic Chemistry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Abstract

Chemists take mechanisms to be an important way of explaining chemical change. I examine the usefulness of the mechanism approach in the recent philosophical literature in explicating the explanatory use of mechanisms by organic chemists. I argue that chemists consider a mechanism to be explanatory because it accounts for the “dynamic process of bringing about” (Tabery 2004, 10) chemical change. For chemists, mechanisms are causal explanations based on interventions that show “how some possibilities depend on others” (Woodward 2003, 375). Only possibilities are achievable because chemists face a number of challenges when they explain by means of a mechanism.

Type
Mechanisms: Beyond Biology to Psychology and Chemistry
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

For helpful comments and suggestions, my thanks to Lindley Darden, Bill Bechtel, Paul Teller, the audience at the 2006 Philosophy of Science Association/History of Science Society meetings and the Spring 2007 members of Philosophy 200 at Smith College.

References

Akeroyd, Michael (2000), “The Foundations of Modern Organic Chemistry: The Rise of the Hughes and Ingold Theory from 1930–1942”, The Foundations of Modern Organic Chemistry: The Rise of the Hughes and Ingold Theory from 1930–1942 2:99125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bechtel, William (2006), Discovering Cell Mechanisms. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Berson, Jerome (1999), Chemical Creativity: Ideas from the Work of Woodward, Hueckel, Meerwein, and Others. New York: Wiley-VCH.Google Scholar
Berson, Jerome (2005), “A Missed Turning Point for Theory in Organic Chemistry: Molecular Orbitals at Montpellier in 1950”, A Missed Turning Point for Theory in Organic Chemistry: Molecular Orbitals at Montpellier in 1950 18:572577.Google Scholar
Brock, William (1993), Norton History of Chemistry. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Carpenter, Barry (2000), “Models and Explanations: Understanding Chemical Reaction Mechanisms”, in Bhushan, N. and Rosenfeld, S. (eds.), Of Minds and Molecules: New Philosophical Perspectives on Chemistry. New York: Oxford University Press, 211229.Google Scholar
Craver, Carl (2002), “Interlevel Experiments and Multilevel Mechanisms in the Neuroscience of Memory”, Interlevel Experiments and Multilevel Mechanisms in the Neuroscience of Memory 69 (Proceedings): S83S97.Google Scholar
Craver, Carl, and Darden, Lindley (2005), “Introduction”, Introduction 36:233244.Google ScholarPubMed
Glennan, Stuart (1996), “Mechanisms and the Nature of Causation”, Mechanisms and the Nature of Causation 44:4971.Google Scholar
Goodwin, William (2003), “Explanation in Organic Chemistry”, Explanation in Organic Chemistry 988:141153.Google ScholarPubMed
Hammett, Louis (1940), Physical Organic Chemistry. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Hughes, Edward, and Ingold, Christopher (1935), “Mechanism of Substitution at a Saturated Carbon Atom. Part IV. A Discussion of Constitutional and Solvent Effects on the Mechanism, Kinetics, Velocity and Orientation of Substitution”, Mechanism of Substitution at a Saturated Carbon Atom. Part IV. A Discussion of Constitutional and Solvent Effects on the Mechanism, Kinetics, Velocity and Orientation of Substitution 1935:244255.Google Scholar
Ingold, Christopher (1953), Structure and Mechanism in Organic Chemistry. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Ingold, Christopher (1964), “Edward David Hughes”, Edward David Hughes 10:147182Google Scholar
Laszlo, Pierre (2005), “Two Textbooks of Note: Sidgwick's Organic Chemistry of Nitrogen (1910) and Gould's Mechanism and Structure in Organic Chemistry (1959)”, Two Textbooks of Note: Sidgwick's Organic Chemistry of Nitrogen (1910) and Gould's Mechanism and Structure in Organic Chemistry (1959) 18:560565.Google Scholar
Lowry, Thomas, and Richardson, Kathleen (1981), Mechanism and Theory in Organic Chemistry. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Machamer, Peter, Darden, Lindley, and Craver, Carl (2000), “Thinking about Mechanisms”, Thinking about Mechanisms 67:125.Google Scholar
Nye, M. J. (1993), From Chemical Philosophy to Theoretical Chemistry: Dynamics of Matter and Dynamics of Disciplines, 1800–1950. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, J. (2005), “Howard J. Lucas: A Pioneer in the Introduction of the Teaching of Physical Organic Chemistry at the College and University Level of Elementary Organic Chemistry”, Howard J. Lucas: A Pioneer in the Introduction of the Teaching of Physical Organic Chemistry at the College and University Level of Elementary Organic Chemistry 18:566571.Google Scholar
Shoppee, Charles (1972), “Christopher Kelk Ingold (1893–1970)”, Christopher Kelk Ingold (1893–1970) 18:348411.Google Scholar
Streitweiser, Andrew, and Heathcock, Clayton (1981), Introduction to Organic Chemistry. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Tabery, James (2004), “Synthesizing Activities and Interactions in the Concept of a Mechanism”, Synthesizing Activities and Interactions in the Concept of a Mechanism 71:115.Google Scholar
Thagard, Paul (1999), How Scientists Explain Disease. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weininger, Stephen (2005), “Textbooks and Tensions That Shaped Physical Organic Chemistry in Its Formative Years”, Textbooks and Tensions That Shaped Physical Organic Chemistry in Its Formative Years 18:555559.Google Scholar
Woodward, James (2003), Making Things Happen. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Woodward, James, and Hitchcock, Christopher (2003), “Explanatory Generalizations, Part I: A Counterfactual Account”, Explanatory Generalizations, Part I: A Counterfactual Account 37:124.Google Scholar