Ernst Mach’s Enlightenment Pragmatism

doi:10.1017/9781108564311.006

5 - Ernst Mach’s Enlightenment Pragmatism

History and Economy in Scientific Cognition

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 March 2021

Thomas Uebel

Edited by

John Preston

Show author details

John Preston: Affiliation:
University of Reading

Book contents

Get access

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.

Keywords

Ernst Mach Pragmatism History of science Economy of thought Evolution Enlightenment

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Interpreting Mach
Critical Essays
, pp. 84 - 102

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108564311.006 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2021

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Banks, Erik C. 2014. The Realistic Empiricism of Mach, James and Russell: Neutral Monism Reconceived. Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Blackmore, John T. (ed.) 1992. Ernst Mach – A Deeper Look: Documents and New Perspectives. Kluwer.CrossRef Google 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.CrossRef Google 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

Lampa, Anton 1912. Ernst Mach. Verlag Deutsche Arbeit.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 1898. Popular Scientific Lectures, 3rd edn. Open Court. Reprinted 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

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.