Scerri, Eric (2006) On the Continuity of Reference of the Elements. A Response to Hendry. UNSPECIFIED.

Microsoft Word (.doc) Hendry_MAY_6th.doc Download (84kB)

Abstract

Robin Hendry has recently argued that although the term ‘element’ has traditionally been used in two different senses, (basic substance and simple substance), there has nonetheless been a continuity of reference. The present article examines this author’s historical and philosophical claims and suggests that he has misdiagnosed the situation in several respects. In particular it is claimed that Hendry’s arguments for the nature of one particular element, oxygen, do not generalize to all elements as he implies. The second main objection is to Hendry’s view that the qua problem can be illuminated by appeal to the intention of scientists

---

Export/Citation:

EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL

Social Networking:

Share |

---

Item Type:	Other
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID Scerri, Eric scerri@chem.ucla.edu 0000-0001-9775-5829
Keywords:	chemistry, causal theory of reference, Lavoisier, element, Mendeleev, Dalton, Putnam & Kripke, Paneth
Subjects:	Specific Sciences > Chemistry
Depositing User:	Eric Scerri
Date Deposited:	24 Nov 2006
Last Modified:	17 Oct 2022 13:52
Item ID:	3063
Subjects:	Specific Sciences > Chemistry
Date:	July 2006
URI:	https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/3063

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item