Helmholtz, Hermann von (1821–94)

Author(s):  
Catherine Chevalley

In physiology, physics, mathematics, aesthetic theory and epistemology, Helmholtz intervened, and innovated. He contributed to the physiology of perception through work on the central nervous system, followed by work on optics and acoustics. He invented instruments, such as the opthalmoscope and introduced the mathematical principle of the conservation of energy to physics. For geometry, Helmholtz elaborated on the concept of an n-dimensional manifold. He secured the influence of the ‘Berlin physics’, introduced Faraday and Maxwell to Germany, refined the theory of electrodynamics and reflected on the role of discrete entities in physics. Having become the most influential representative of German science and its uncontested spokesperson, he repeated the importance of the connection between education and research and the necessity not to separate the natural sciences (Naturwissenschaften) from the social sciences (Geisteswissenschaften). This monumental body of work is experiencing a revival of interest today as historians of both science and culture consider it in a new light. But the question remains of how to characterize what we might call ‘the Helmholtz effect’ in philosophy. Why was Helmholtz equally influential not only on Cassirer, Husserl, Schlick, Meyerson and Freud, but also on the principal founders of contemporary physics; Einstein, Bohr and Heisenberg? To grasp this, we must understand the constant interaction between science and philosophy which characterized, even permitted, the extraordinary developments in mathematics, physics and physiology in Germany at that time. Here the connection between Helmholtz and Kant is fundamental, since ‘the Helmholtz effect’ transformed the Kantian heritage. Helmholtz did not write a systematic philosophical work, but in redefining fundamental epistemological concepts and constructing a large part of the conceptual structure in which both philosophy and relativistic and quantum physics developed during the early twentieth century, he modified the very problems of epistemology.

2007 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 409-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Jo nye

Historians and sociologists of science often identify the ef.orescence of social stud-ies of science with the work of postwar American intellectuals such as Robert K. Merton and Thomas S. Kuhn. They often also refer to the views of Michael Polanyi (1891––1976) on the roles of tacit knowledge, apprenticeship, social tradition, and intellectual dogmas (or what Kuhn popularized as "paradigms") in the construction of scienti.c knowledge. The roots of Polanyi's views on the social nature of sci-ence and his insistence on the need for scientists' autonomy in managing their own affairs lie speci.cally in his career experiences as a physical chemist from 1920 to 1933 in the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gesellschaft Institutes in Berlin-Dahlem. Polanyi worked in an institution in which scienti.c research was supported by an array of state, industrial, and philanthropic funds, but in which he and his colleagues enjoyed substantial autonomy in their everyday research. His own successes and failures in the .elds of physical chemistry, x-ray crystallography, and solid-state chemistry led him to re.ect upon the everyday practices of normal science and to stress the role of the ordinary rather than the revolutionary scientist in the production of scienti.c knowledge. Polanyi's views lend insight into the character of German science and the research institutes in Berlin-Dahlem in the late 19th and early 20th century.


2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Bonetto ◽  
Fabien Girandola ◽  
Grégory Lo Monaco

Abstract. This contribution consists of a critical review of the literature about the articulation of two traditionally separated theoretical fields: social representations and commitment. Besides consulting various works and communications, a bibliographic search was carried out (between February and December, 2016) on various databases using the keywords “commitment” and “social representation,” in the singular and in the plural, in French and in English. Articles published in English or in French, that explicitly made reference to both terms, were included. The relations between commitment and social representations are approached according to two approaches or complementary lines. The first line follows the role of commitment in the representational dynamics: how can commitment transform the representations? This articulation gathers most of the work on the topic. The second line envisages the social representations as determinants of commitment procedures: how can these representations influence the effects of commitment procedures? This literature review will identify unexploited tracks, as well as research perspectives for both areas of research.


1997 ◽  
pp. 3-8
Author(s):  
Borys Lobovyk

An important problem of religious studies, the history of religion as a branch of knowledge is the periodization process of the development of religious phenomenon. It is precisely here, as in focus, that the question of the essence and meaning of the religious development of the human being of the world, the origin of beliefs and cult, the reasons for the changes in them, the place and role of religion in the social and spiritual process, etc., are converging.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document