Both Lavoisier and Priestley were committed to the role of experiment and observation in their chemistry practice. According to Lavoisier the physical sciences embody three important ingredients; facts, ideas, and language, and Priestley would not have disagreed with this. Ideas had to be consistent with the facts generated from experiment and observation and language needed to be precise and reflect the known chemistry of substances. While Priestley was comfortable with a moderate amount of hypothesis making, Lavoisier had no time for what he termed theoretical speculation about the fundamental nature of matter and avoided the use of the atomic hypothesis and Aristotle’s elements in his Elements of Chemistry. In the preface to this famous work he claims he has good educational reasons for this position. While Priestley and Lavoisier used similar kinds of apparatus in their chemistry practice, they came to their task with completely different worldviews as regards the nature of chemical reactivity. This paper examines these worldviews as practiced in the famous experiment on the composition of air and the implications of this for chemistry education are considered.
...More
Article
Basu, Prajit K.;
(2003)
Theory-Ladenness of Evidence: A Case Study from History of Chemistry
(/isis/citation/CBB000340883/)
Thesis
Basu, Prajit K.;
(1992)
Scientific explanation in the history of chemistry: The Priestley-Lavoisier debate
(/isis/citation/CBB001564400/)
Chapter
Akeroyd, Michael;
(2003)
The Lavoisier-Kirwan Debate and Approaches to the Evaluation of Theories
(/isis/citation/CBB000600081/)
Book
Jackson, Joe;
(2005)
A World on Fire: A Heretic, an Aristocrat, and the Race to Discover Oxygen
(/isis/citation/CBB000600699/)
Book
Djerassi, Carl;
Hoffmann, Roald;
(2001)
Oxygen: A Play in Two Acts
(/isis/citation/CBB000430084/)
Article
Thomas Apel;
(2020)
‘Revolutions, Philosophical as Well as Civil’: French Chemistry and American Science in Samuel Latham Mitchill’s Medical Repository
(/isis/citation/CBB071972955/)
Book
George Fleck;
(2016)
Parallel Lives: Two Hoosier Chemists From Peru
(/isis/citation/CBB884707653/)
Article
Beretta, Marco;
(1993)
Chemists in the storm: Lavoisier, Priestley and the French Revolution
(/isis/citation/CBB000044966/)
Article
Anderson, Wilda C.;
(1981)
Translating the language of chemistry: Priestley and Lavoisier
(/isis/citation/CBB000020125/)
Book
(1995)
Lavoisier in European context: Negotiating a new language for chemistry
(/isis/citation/CBB000071375/)
Article
Eddy, Matthew Daniel;
(2014)
How to See a Diagram: A Visual Anthropology of Chemical Affinity
(/isis/citation/CBB001550415/)
Book
Bensaude-Vincent, Bernadette;
Blondel, Christine;
(2008)
Science and Spectacle in the European Enlightenment
(/isis/citation/CBB000850395/)
Chapter
Brock, W. H.;
(2008)
Joseph Priestley, Enlightened Experimentalist
(/isis/citation/CBB000760373/)
Article
Levere, Trevor H.;
(2009)
Dr. Thomas Beddoes: Chemistry, Medicine, and the Perils of Democracy
(/isis/citation/CBB000932256/)
Article
Watanabe, Yoshiaki;
(2005)
The American Chemical Society and Joseph Priestley
(/isis/citation/CBB000630963/)
Article
Anderson, Robert;
(2005)
Joseph Priestley: Public Intellectual
(/isis/citation/CBB000741443/)
Article
J. Marc Macdonald;
(2020)
Failed Utopias and Practical Chemistry: The Priestleys, the Du Ponts, and the Transmission of Transatlantic Science, 1770–1820
(/isis/citation/CBB179199218/)
Book
Johnson, Steven;
(2008)
The Invention of Air: A Story of Science, Faith, Revolution, and the Birth of America
(/isis/citation/CBB000954683/)
Article
Kuhno, Toshiya;
(2005)
Priestley's Chemistry as a Branch of Experimental Philosophy
(/isis/citation/CBB000630961/)
Article
Mary Ellen Bowden;
Dee Ann Castel;
(2019)
Note: A modern scientific interpretation of Joseph Priestley's discovery of CO
(/isis/citation/CBB228856864/)
Be the first to comment!