What to make of Mendeleev’s predictions?

Foundations of Chemistry 21 (2):139-143 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I critically examine Stewart’s suggestion that we should weigh the various predictions Mendeleev made differently. I argue that in his effort to justify discounting the weight of some of Mendeleev’s failures, Stewart invokes a principle that will, in turn, reduce the weight of some of the successful predictions Mendeleev made. So Stewart’s strategy will not necessarily lead to a net gain in Mendeleev’s favor.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Use-novel predictions and Mendeleev’s periodic table: response to Scerri and Worrall.Samuel Schindler - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 39 (2):265-269.
Mendeleev’s predictions: success and failure.Philip J. Stewart - 2018 - Foundations of Chemistry 21 (1):3-9.
Lavoisier and mendeleev on the elements.Robin Findlay Hendry - 2004 - Foundations of Chemistry 7 (1):31-48.
Novelty, coherence, and Mendeleev’s periodic table.Samuel Schindler - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 45:62-69.
Mendeleev and the Rare-Earth Crisis.Pieter Thyssen & Koen Binnemans - 2015 - In Eric Scerri & Lee McIntyre (eds.), Philosophy of Chemistry: Growth of a New Discipline. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. pp. 155-182.
On Mendeleev’s predictions: comment on Scerri and Worrall.Eric Barnes - 2005 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 36 (4):801-812.
Prediction and the periodic table.R. E. & J. Worrall - 2001 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 32 (3):407-452.
Prediction and the periodic table.Eric R. Scerri & John Worrall - 2001 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 32 (3):407-452.
Mendeleev's periodic system of chemical elements.Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent - 1986 - British Journal for the History of Science 19 (1):3-17.
Substantial confusion.Robin Findlay Hendry - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 37 (2):322-336.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-04-25

Downloads
13 (#886,827)

6 months
2 (#670,035)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

K. Brad Wray
Aarhus University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Prediction and the periodic table.Eric R. Scerri & John Worrall - 2001 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 32 (3):407-452.
The atomic number revolution in chemistry: a Kuhnian analysis.K. Brad Wray - 2017 - Foundations of Chemistry 20 (3):209-217.
Novelty, coherence, and Mendeleev’s periodic table.Samuel Schindler - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 45:62-69.
Mendeleev’s predictions: success and failure.Philip J. Stewart - 2018 - Foundations of Chemistry 21 (1):3-9.

Add more references