History of Science and Technology Colloquium

Through a re-examination of the Chemical Revolution, I advance an argument for scientific pluralism. My assessment, made on the basis of a comprehensive list of epistemic values, returns the verdict that there was no compelling rational reason for 18th-century chemists to discard the phlogiston theory. I then examine the benefits that could have (or could still) come from retaining or reviving phlogiston, with particular reference to Douglas Allchin's work. Finally I sketch some general arguments for scientific pluralism, building on existing arguments especially by Feyerabend and by Kellert, Longino and Waters.

Cosponsored by the Minnesota Center for Philosophy of Science.