



{"id":31,"date":"2013-02-08T12:20:22","date_gmt":"2013-02-08T12:20:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/karlpearson\/?page_id=31"},"modified":"2013-02-08T12:23:39","modified_gmt":"2013-02-08T12:23:39","slug":"physics-and-philosophy","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/karlpearson\/writing-about-pearson\/physics-and-philosophy\/","title":{"rendered":"Physics and philosophy"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The most thorough account of Pearson\u2019s work in physics and the philosophy of science is in chapter 3 of Porter (2004). Modern textbooks seldom mention Pearson\u2019s contributions to applied mathematics\/physics, though the Pearson-Todhunter History is still referred to. Nor is there much historical literature; there are a few remarks in<\/p>\n<p>M. Jammer (1961) Concepts of Mass in Classical and Modern Physics, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.<\/p>\n<p>A recent article has examined Todhunter and Pearson together with the other important historians of elasticity<\/p>\n<p>L. A. Godoy (2006) Historical Sense in the Historians of the Theory of Elasticity, Meccanica, 41, Number 5, October, 2006.<\/p>\n<p>Pearson\u2019s philosophy of science has received more attention. Passmore and Porter discuss it in relation to the ideas of other late 19th century physicists<\/p>\n<p>J. Passmore (1968) A Hundred Years of Philosophy, 2nd edition, Harmondsworth: Penguin.<\/p>\n<p>T. M. Porter (1994) The Death of the Object: Fin-de-Si\u00e8cle Philosophy of Physics, in D. M. Ross (ed.) Modernist Impulses in the Human Sciences, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.<\/p>\n<p>Thiele has reproduced the correspondence between Mach and Pearson<\/p>\n<p>Joachim Thiele (1969) Karl Pearson, Ernst Mach, John B. Stallo: Briefe aus den Jahren 1897 bis 1904, Isis, 60, 535-542.<\/p>\n<p>Porter draws on Pearson\u2019s novel and passion play to discuss his philosophy taken more broadly\u2014including his attitudes to religion and socialism\u2014in<\/p>\n<p>T. M. Porter (1999) Reason, Faith, and Alienation in the Victorian Fin-de-Si\u00e8cle in H. E. Bodecker (ed.) Wissenschaft als Kulturelle Praxis. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &amp; Ruprecht.<\/p>\n<p>In this essay Porter compares Pearson with John Henry Newman. Levine compares him with Walter Pater:<\/p>\n<p>George Levine (2000) Two Ways Not To Be a Solipsist: Art and Science, Pater and Pearson, Victorian Studies, 43, 7-42. (available online at http:\/\/iupress.indiana.edu\/journals\/victorian\/vic43-1.html<\/p>\n<p>Herbert detects Feuerbach\u2019s influence in the Grammar of Science<\/p>\n<p>Christopher Herbert (1996) Science and Narcissism, Modernism\/Modernity, 3, 129-135. Available online to subscribing institutions at<\/p>\n<p>http:\/\/muse.jhu.edu\/journals\/modernism-modernity\/v003\/3.3herbert.html<\/p>\n<p>The Grammar made little impression on professional philosophers but it was inspiring to a number of scientifically-minded youngsters including Harold Jeffreys and Jerzy Neyman.\u00a0 Raymond Pearl testified to this influence on his generation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The most thorough account of Pearson\u2019s work in physics and the philosophy of science is in chapter 3 of Porter (2004). Modern textbooks seldom mention Pearson\u2019s contributions to applied mathematics\/physics, though the Pearson-Todhunter History is still referred to. Nor is there much historical literature; there are a few remarks in M. Jammer (1961) Concepts of [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":77439,"featured_media":0,"parent":29,"menu_order":10,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-31","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/karlpearson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/31","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/karlpearson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/karlpearson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/karlpearson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/77439"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/karlpearson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=31"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/karlpearson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/31\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":43,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/karlpearson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/31\/revisions\/43"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/karlpearson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/29"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/karlpearson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}