Cookie preferences
Cookie preferences


Apostolado da Oração


Pierre Duhem and Ernst Mach: Science and Philosophy

Pierre Duhem and Ernst Mach: Science and Philosophy

Pierre Duhem and Ernst Mach: Science and Philosophy
Editor: María de Paz; Antonio Augusto Passos Videira; Álvaro Balsas, SJ
2018, Volume 74, Issue 1
DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0000

More details

On sale On sale!
20,00 € tax excl.

Pierre Duhem e Ernst Mach: Ciência e Filosofia

Pierre Duhem and Ernst Mach: Science and Philosophy

 Editor María de Paz
Editor Antonio Augusto Passos Videira
Editor Álvaro Balsas, SJ
Rights © 2018 Aletheia - Associação Científica e Cultural | © 2018 Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia
Publication Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia
Volume 74
Issue 1
Place Braga
Publisher Axioma - Publicacções da Faculdade de Filosofia


978-972-697-294-5 (Paperback) ; 978-972-697-295-2 (eBook)



Date 2018
DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0000
Language Portuguese, English, Spanish
# of Pages 352
Date Added 27/04/2018
Modified 27/04/2018
Presentation Ernst Mach (1838-1916) and Pierre Duhem (1861-1916) were leading scientists, philosophers and historians of science of their times. They lived and worked in a context marked by deep changes in the natural sciences, and in an epoch of intense social transformations. Regarding the sciences, we could just mention the development of electromagnetic theory, the decline of classical mechanics, the development of evolutionary theory, the emergence of the special and general theories of relativity or the controversy on the atomic structure of nature. Concerning society, we have to remember the historical background previous to the World War I and the cultural environment developed in Europe in those years. As to the relationship between science and society, the end of the nineteenth century witnessed the emergence of a radical critique of science, which questioned its fundamental values. In a way, we can understand the philosophies of these two figures as replies to such criticisms. The main purpose of this thematic issue was to offer a forum for further re-questioning Mach’s and Duhem’s views and the impact that their work can still have nowadays. Our wish was to provide fresh views on the work of both authors, one hundred years after their passing. We think that the papers below have very well accomplished this aim.

María De Paz and Antonio Augusto Passos Videira, “Presentation – Pierre Duhem and Ernst Mach: Science and Philosophy,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia74, no. 1 (2018): 13–16, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0013


José R. N. Chiappin, “A Methodology for the Theory of Science and Its Application to the Reconstruction of the Metaphysical Level of Duhem’s Theory of Science,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 19–58, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0019


Alexander Maar, “Aspectos da Filosofia da Ciência de Pierre Duhem: Variedades de Subdeterminação Empírica e a Função do Bom Senso na Escolha entre Teorias,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 59–84, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0059


Rogelio Miranda Vilchis, “The Distinction Between Physics and Metaphysics in Duhem’s Philosophy,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 85–114, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0085


Carlos Fils Puig and Antonio Augusto Passos Videira, “Que Sentido dar à Metafísica e ao Senso Comum? Uma Análise das Atitudes Filosóficas de Mach e Duhem à Luz da Distinção entre Fato e Valor,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 115–32, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0115


Damian Islas Mondragon, “Ernst Mach, Karl R. Popper y Thomas S. Kuhn: Aportaciones al Estudio de los Experimentos Mentales,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 133–50, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0133


Pietro Gori, “Ernst Mach and Pragmatic Realism,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia74, no. 1 (2018): 151–72, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0151


Isabel Serra and Elisa Maia, “Looking for Routes in Mach’s Epistemology,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 173–96, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0173


Ricardo Lopes Coelho, “Estudo Histórico-Crítico da Fundamentação da Mecânica por Mach,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 197–218, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0197


María De Paz, “Reconsidering Mach in the Light of the Interplay of Practices,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 219–46, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0219


Bruno Nobre and Antonio Augusto Passos Videira, “Philosophy Matters: Steven Weinberg, Reductionism, and Inevitability,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 249–78, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0249


Rodolfo Petrônio da Costa, “Bohr e Einstein: Filosofia, Debate e Controvérsia,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 279–94, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0279


John Farina, “What’s Missing in the Secularization Debate?,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 295–308, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0295


Bruno Cunha, “Kant e a sua Crítica a Hutcheson e à Doutrina do Sentimento Moral na Década de 1770,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 309–26, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0309


Ricardo Barroso Batista, “Book Review - R. Paul Thompson e Ross E.G. Upshur, Philosophy of Medicine: An Introduction,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 329–32, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0329


Ricardo Barroso Batista, “Book Review - Edward Feser, Five Proofs of the Existence of God,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 74, no. 1 (2018): 333–38, DOI 10.17990/RPF/2018_74_1_0333


No products

Shipping 0,00 €
Total 0,00 €

Cart Check out