Skip Navigation


The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science Advance Access originally published online on April 30, 2007
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 2007 58(2):339-353; doi:10.1093/bjps/axm008
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
58/2/339    most recent
axm008v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hendry, R. F.
Right arrow Articles by Needham, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Copyright © The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Society for the Philosophy of Science.

Le Poidevin on the Reduction of Chemistry

Robin Findlay Hendry and Paul Needham

Department of Philosophy, Durham University, 50 Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HN UK
Department of Philosophy, University of Stockholm, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden

r.f.hendry{at}durham.ac.uk

paul.needham{at}philosophy.su.se


  Abstract

In this article we critically evaluate Robin Le Poidevin's recent attempt to set out an argument for the ontological reduction of chemistry independently of intertheoretic reduction. We argue, firstly, that the argument he envisages applies only to a small part of chemistry, and that there is no obvious way to extend it. We argue, secondly, that the argument cannot establish the reduction of chemistry, properly so called.

1 Introduction
2 The scope of the reductionist claim
3 The combinatorial argument
4 The strength of the ‘reduction’
5 Concluding remarks


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.