No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
On Comrade Timiryazev’s attitude towards contemporary science
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2022
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Historical Document
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
Footnotes
1
The following is a translation of Gessen & Egorshin 1927b: 188–199. Hessen & Egorshin’s original references have been replaced by English where possible. References to texts not cited by Hessen & Egorshin have been provided by the translator. This translation was completed with the aid of translation software [Translator’s Note; hereafter, “TN”].
2
Vasiliy P. Egorshin (1898–1985) was a Soviet physicist and historian and philosopher of science. He worked as a professor of physics at Moscow State University, and specialized in the history of astronomy from a dialectical materialist point of view. A co-author with Hessen on several articles in the late 1920s, by the 1930s, Egorshin became one of Hessen’s major opponents, accusing him of “anti-Marxism,” “idealism” and “Menshevism” (Josephson 1991, 208; Korsakov, et al. 2015, 90–91) [TN].
References
Bibliography
Brenner, Anastasios. 2018. “From Scientific Philosophy to Absolute Positivism.” Philosophia Scientiæ 22 (3):77–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calore, Gary S. 2016. “John Bernhard Stallo (1823–1900).” In The Bloomsbury Encyclopedia of Philosophers in America: From 1600 to the Present. Edited by John, R. Shook, 928–930. London/New Delhi/New York/Oxford/Sydney: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Daintith, John. 2008. “Rydberg Constant.” In A Dictionary of Chemistry, 6th Ed., 468–469. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Darwin, Charles G. 1927a. “The Electron as a Vector Wave.” Nature 119: 282–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, Charles G. 1927b. “The Electron as a Vector Wave.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London – Series A, containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character 116: 227–253.Google Scholar
Engels, Friedrich. 2010. Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy
. In Marx & Engels: Collected Works, vol. 26 – Engels 1882–89. Edited by Tartakovsky, B. et al. and translated by Jacbos, Nicholas et al., 353–398. London: Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar
Fletcher, Harvey. 1945. “Biographical Memoir of Dayton Clarence Miller, 1866–1941.” National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America – Biographical Memoirs 23:59–74.Google Scholar
Giulini, Domenico. 2005. Special Relativity: A First Encounter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Graham, Loren R. 1993. Science in Russia and the Soviet Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ings, Simon. 2016. Stalin and the Scientists: A History of Triumph and Tragedy, 1905–1953. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press.Google Scholar
Jaki, Stanley. 1991. Scientist and Catholic: An Essay on Pierre Duhem. Westchester: Christendom Press.Google Scholar
Joravsky, David. 2009. Soviet Marxism and Natural Science, 1917–1932. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Josephson, Paul. 1991. Physics and Politics in Revolutionary Russia. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laqueur, Walter. 1996. Fascism: Past, Present, Future. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lenin, Vladimir. 1973. “On the Significance of Militant Materialism.” In V.I. Lenin – Collected Works, Vol. 33; August 1921–March 1923. Edited by Skvirsky, David and translated by Hanna, George, 227–236. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
Lenin, Vladimir. 1976. “On the Question of Dialectics.” In V.I. Lenin: Collected Works, vol. 38 – Philosophical Notebooks. Edited by Smith, Stewart and translated by Dutt, Clemens, 357–361. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
Lenin, Vladimir. 1977. Materialism and Empirio-Criticism: Critical Comments on A Reactionary Philosophy. In V.I. Lenin – Collected Works, Vol. 14; 1908. Edited by Dutt, Clemens and translated by Fineberg, Abraham. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst. 1898. “The Economical Nature of Physical Inquiry.” In Popular Scientific Lectures, 3 rd Ed. Translated by McCormack, Thomas J., 186–213. Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Magie, William F. 1963. “Balmer.” In A Source Book in Physics, 360–365. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Maugin, Gerard A. 2014. “On Duhem’s Energetics or General Thermodynamics.” In Continuum Mechanics through the 18th and 19th Centuries: Historical Perspectives from John Bernoulli (1727) to Ernst Hellinger (1914), 149–185. Dordrecht/Heidelberg/London/New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Sheehan, Helena. 1985. Marxism and the Philosophy of Science: A Critical History. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press International, Inc.Google Scholar
Nobel Foundation. 1998. “Biography W. Wien.” In Nobel Lectures in Physics (1901–1921), 287–290. Singapore/New Jersey/London/Hong Kong: World Scientific.Google Scholar
Schröder, Ulrich E. 2008. “Erwin Madelung, 1881–1972.” web.archive.org (last accessed 19 February 2021).Google Scholar
Stepanov, Boris I. 1977. “Gustav Robert Kirchhoff (On the 90th Anniversary of His Death).” Journal of Applied Spectroscopy. Translated by unknown 27 (3):1099–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenner, Anastasios. 2018. “From Scientific Philosophy to Absolute Positivism.” Philosophia Scientiæ 22 (3):77–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calore, Gary S. 2016. “John Bernhard Stallo (1823–1900).” In The Bloomsbury Encyclopedia of Philosophers in America: From 1600 to the Present. Edited by John, R. Shook, 928–930. London/New Delhi/New York/Oxford/Sydney: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Daintith, John. 2008. “Rydberg Constant.” In A Dictionary of Chemistry, 6th Ed., 468–469. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Darwin, Charles G. 1927a. “The Electron as a Vector Wave.” Nature 119: 282–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, Charles G. 1927b. “The Electron as a Vector Wave.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London – Series A, containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character 116: 227–253.Google Scholar
Engels, Friedrich. 2010. Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy
. In Marx & Engels: Collected Works, vol. 26 – Engels 1882–89. Edited by Tartakovsky, B. et al. and translated by Jacbos, Nicholas et al., 353–398. London: Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar
Fletcher, Harvey. 1945. “Biographical Memoir of Dayton Clarence Miller, 1866–1941.” National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America – Biographical Memoirs 23:59–74.Google Scholar
Giulini, Domenico. 2005. Special Relativity: A First Encounter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Graham, Loren R. 1993. Science in Russia and the Soviet Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ings, Simon. 2016. Stalin and the Scientists: A History of Triumph and Tragedy, 1905–1953. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press.Google Scholar
Jaki, Stanley. 1991. Scientist and Catholic: An Essay on Pierre Duhem. Westchester: Christendom Press.Google Scholar
Joravsky, David. 2009. Soviet Marxism and Natural Science, 1917–1932. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Josephson, Paul. 1991. Physics and Politics in Revolutionary Russia. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laqueur, Walter. 1996. Fascism: Past, Present, Future. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lenin, Vladimir. 1973. “On the Significance of Militant Materialism.” In V.I. Lenin – Collected Works, Vol. 33; August 1921–March 1923. Edited by Skvirsky, David and translated by Hanna, George, 227–236. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
Lenin, Vladimir. 1976. “On the Question of Dialectics.” In V.I. Lenin: Collected Works, vol. 38 – Philosophical Notebooks. Edited by Smith, Stewart and translated by Dutt, Clemens, 357–361. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
Lenin, Vladimir. 1977. Materialism and Empirio-Criticism: Critical Comments on A Reactionary Philosophy. In V.I. Lenin – Collected Works, Vol. 14; 1908. Edited by Dutt, Clemens and translated by Fineberg, Abraham. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst. 1898. “The Economical Nature of Physical Inquiry.” In Popular Scientific Lectures, 3 rd Ed. Translated by McCormack, Thomas J., 186–213. Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Magie, William F. 1963. “Balmer.” In A Source Book in Physics, 360–365. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Maugin, Gerard A. 2014. “On Duhem’s Energetics or General Thermodynamics.” In Continuum Mechanics through the 18th and 19th Centuries: Historical Perspectives from John Bernoulli (1727) to Ernst Hellinger (1914), 149–185. Dordrecht/Heidelberg/London/New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Sheehan, Helena. 1985. Marxism and the Philosophy of Science: A Critical History. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press International, Inc.Google Scholar
Nobel Foundation. 1998. “Biography W. Wien.” In Nobel Lectures in Physics (1901–1921), 287–290. Singapore/New Jersey/London/Hong Kong: World Scientific.Google Scholar
Schröder, Ulrich E. 2008. “Erwin Madelung, 1881–1972.” web.archive.org (last accessed 19 February 2021).Google Scholar
Stepanov, Boris I. 1977. “Gustav Robert Kirchhoff (On the 90th Anniversary of His Death).” Journal of Applied Spectroscopy. Translated by unknown 27 (3):1099–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
German
Kirchhoff, Gustav R. 1897. Vorlesungen über Mechanik, 4. Aufl. Leipzig: Druck und Verlag von B.G. Teubner.Google Scholar
Madelung, Erwin. 1926. „Eine anschauliche Deutung der Gleichung von Schrödinger.“ Die Naturwissenschaften 14: 1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madelung, Erwin. 1927. „Quantentheorie in hydrodynamischer Form.“ Zeitschrift für Physik 40:322–326.10.1007/BF01400372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rüchardt, Eduard. 1955. „Zur Erinnerung an Wilhelm Wien bei der 25. Wiederkehr seines Todestages.“ Naturwissenschaften 42:57–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schrödinger, Erwin. 1926. „Quantisierung als Eigenwertproblem (Vierte Mitteilung).“ Annalen der Physik 81:109–139.Google Scholar
Wien, Wilhelm. 1926. Vergangenheit, Gegenwart und Zukunft der Physik: Rede gehalten beim Stiftungsfest der Universität München. Munich: Max Hueber.Google Scholar
Russian
Ermichëv, Aleksandr A. 2012. «Retsenziya na Zhurnal Pod znamenem marksizma, 1922–1944 [Review of the Journal Under the Banner of Marxism, 1922–1944]». Voprosy filosofii [Problems of Philosophy] 7:184–186.Google Scholar
Gessen, Boris M. & Egorshin, Vasiliy P.. 1927a. «V s’yezd russkikh fizikov [The 5th Congress of Russian Physicist]». Pod znamenem marksizma [Under the Banner of Marxism] 1:134–141.Google Scholar
Gessen, Boris M. & Egorshin, Vasiliy P.. 1927b. «Ob otnoshenii tov. Timiryazeva k sovremennoy nauke [On Cde. Timiryazev’s Attitude towards Contemporary Science]». Pod znamenem marksizma 2 (3):188–199.Google Scholar
Ioffe, Abram F. 1927. «Chto govoryat opyty o teorii otnositel’nosti Eynshteyna? [What Experiments Say about Einsteinian Relativity?]». Pravda [Truth], 1 January, p. ?.Google Scholar
Korsakov, Sergei N., et al. 2015. Boris Mikailovich Gessen. 1893–1936. Moskva [Moscow]: Nauka [Science].Google Scholar
Plank, Max. 1926. «Fizicheskaya zakonomernost’ v svete novykh issledovaniy [Physical Laws in Light of Recent Research]». Uspekhi fizicheskikh nauk [Advances in Physical Sciences] 6:177–192.Google Scholar
Timiryazev, Arkady K. 1924. «Lenin i sovremennoye yestestvoznaniye [Lenin and Modern Natural Science]». Pod znamenem marksizma 2:221–231.Google Scholar
Timiryazev, Arkady K. 1925a. «Teoriya ‘kvant’ i sovremennaya fizika [‘Quantum’ Theory and Contemporary Physics]». In Yestestvoznaniye i dialekticheskiy materialism [Natural Science and Dialectical Materialism], 114–139. Moskva: Matyerialist [Materialist].Google Scholar
Timiryazev, Arkady K. 1925b. «Noveyshiye popytki voskresit’ teleologiyu v fizike [Recent Attempts to Revive Teleology in Physics]». In Yestestvoznaniye i dialekticheskiy materialism, 317–330. Moskva: Matyerialist.Google Scholar
Timiryazev, Arkady K. 1927a. «Po povodu diskussii ob opytakh Deyton-Millera na s’yezde russkikh fizikov [Regarding the Discussion about the Dayton-Miller Experiments at the Congress of Russian Physicists]». Pod znamenem marksizma 2/3: 178–187.Google Scholar