Erich Kretschmann as a proto-logical-empiricist: Adventures and misadventures of the point-coincidence argument

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 44 (2):115-134 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The present paper attempts to show that a 1915 article by Erich Kretschmann must be credited not only for being the source of Einstein’s point-coincidence remark, but also for having anticipated the main lines of the logical-empiricist interpretation of general relativity. Whereas Kretschmann was inspired by the work of Mach and Poincaré, Einstein inserted Kretschmann’s point-coincidence parlance into the context of Ricci and Levi-Civita’s absolute differential calculus. Kretschmann himself realized this and turned the point-coincidence argument against Einstein in his second and more famous 1918 paper. While Einstein had taken nothing from Kretschmann but the expression “point-coincidences”, the logical empiricists, however, instinctively dragged along with it the entire apparatus of Kretschmann’s conventionalism. Disappointingly, in their interpretation of general relativity, the logical empiricists unwittingly replicated some epistemological remarks Kretschmann had written before General Relativity even existed.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 99,322

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-11-01

Downloads
85 (#211,322)

6 months
19 (#137,509)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Marco Giovanelli
Università di Torino

Citations of this work

‘But one must not legalize the mentioned sin’: Phenomenological vs. dynamical treatments of rods and clocks in Einstein׳s thought.Marco Giovanelli - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 48 (1):20-44.
Some Philosophical Prehistory of the (Earman-Norton) hole argument.James Owen Weatherall - 2020 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 70:79-87.
‘…But I still can׳t get rid of a sense of artificiality’: The Reichenbach–Einstein debate on the geometrization of the electromagnetic field.Marco Giovanelli - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 54:35-51.

View all 10 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

What price spacetime substantivalism? The hole story.John Earman & John Norton - 1987 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 38 (4):515-525.
Space-Time-Matter.Hermann Weyl - 1922 - London,: E.P. Dutton and Company. Edited by Henry L. Brose.
Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist.Stephen Toulmin - 1950 - Science and Society 14 (4):353-360.
Theory of relativity.Wolfgang Pauli - 1958 - New York,: Pergamon Press.

View all 46 references / Add more references