John, List: JFS: Every branch of science has four kinds of developers: (1) naturalists, (2) experimenters, (3) theoreticians, and (4) engineers.
Peirce similarly divided the physical sciences into nomological, classificatory, and descriptive, and considered engineering to be a *practical *science. CSP: Nomological physics discovers the ubiquitous phenomena of the physical universe, formulates their laws, and measures their constants. It draws upon metaphysics and upon mathematics for principles. Classificatory physics describes and classifies physical forms and seeks to explain them by the laws discovered by nomological physics with which it ultimately tends to coalesce. Descriptive physics describes individual objects--the earth and the heavens--endeavors to explain their phenomena by the principles of nomological and classificatory physics, and tends ultimately itself to become classificatory. (CP 1.188, 1903) He went on to suggest that physics proper is nomological, chemistry and biology are classificatory, and geognosy and astronomy are descriptive (CP 1.193-198; also CP 1.257-263, 1902). Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 11:04 AM, John F Sowa <[email protected]> wrote: > Clark and Jerry, > > Every branch of science has four kinds of developers: (1) naturalists, > (2) experimenters, (3) theoreticians, and (4) engineers. They often > disagree, but they need each other. Many of them play two or more > roles at different times. Peirce played all four roles in his various > work in science and engineering. > > Naturalists gather data as they find it. For millennia, biology was > dominated by naturalists who gathered and classified data about plants > and animals. Most of the experiments were done by farmers who were > and still are biological engineers. > > In biology, Aristotle was mostly a naturalist, but he also proposed > theories and did some experiments (with the help of his students). > Aristotle's writing on embryology (supported by experiments with > chicken eggs) was a paradigm of how to do science. > > It's not possible to do detailed experiments without some theory. > The theory of phlogiston, for example, was the basis for precise > measurements, which led to the 19th c. theories of thermodynamics, > which led to Boltzmann's statistical mechanics, which led to Planck's > theory of radiation, which led to Einstein's 1905 version of quantum > mechanics. > > CG > >> Theoretical chemists are physicists. <grin> >> > > JLRC > >> As you probably expect, my views of “theoretical chemists” are >> radically different. <grin> >> > > Chemistry and physics developed together. The chemists were about > a century ahead of the physicists in developing theories of atoms > and molecules. Even in the early 20th century, Ernst Mach refused > to admit any theories about unobservable atoms. > > Mach's constant denunciations about theories of atoms made life > extremely unpleasant for Boltzmann in Vienna. In the summer of > 1905, Boltzmann and his family were on vacation in Italy. When > they were preparing to return, Boltzmann hanged himself. > > JLRC > >> From roughly 1913 (Rutherford/Moseley papers on the structure >> of atoms) until roughly 1970, your assertion is reasonable in that >> the physics community provided the rational for chemical reasoning. >> > > For most of the 20th century, hydrogen was the only atom that > physicists could explain by working out the math. For all other > atoms and molecules, physicists depended on *chemical reasoning*. > > Even today, physicists start with chemical data and reasoning for > guidelines and insights about which phenomena are worth pursuing > with detailed computations. > > John
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
