Affiliation:
1. Science and Technology Studies, University College London
Abstract
Abstract
This chapter examines Peirce’s work on and with diagrams and places it in a historical and historiographical context. The chapter shows that Peirce’s philosophical reflections on diagrammatic representations and diagrammatic thinking are greatly enriched when placed explicitly in dialogue with the scientific practice of the time and considered from the perspective of what historians of science have characterized as its “moral economy.” It argues that diagrams and diagrammatic practices, as they emerged and consolidated throughout Peirce’s lifetime, were the shared common ground over which an ever-expanding community of scientists negotiated their reasonings and that debates over validity, rigor, perspicuity, and communicability were as much about issues of reliable representation as they were about the reliability and standing of scientists themselves. Peirce was right at the center of these debates, and his philosophical writings on diagrams, as well as his ambitious program for an innovative system of diagrammatic logic, reflect his active participation in them.
Reference62 articles.
1. Abeles, Francine. 2016. “Clifford and Sylvester on the Development of Peirce’s Matrix Formulation of the Algebra of Relations, 1870–1882,” Research in History and Philosophy of Mathematics, edited by Maria Zack and Dirk Schlimm, 83–91. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
2. Toward an integrated History and Philosophy of Diagrammatic Practices,;East Asian Science, Technology and Society,2020
3. Ambrosio, Chiara, and Chris Campbell. 2017. “The Chemistry of Relations: Peirce, Perspicuous Representations, and Experiments with Diagrams,” in Peirce on Perception and Reasoning: From Icons to Logic, edited by Kathleen A. Hull and Richard Kenneth Atkins, 86–106. New York: Routledge.
4. History of the Inductive Sciences” and “Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, Founded upon Their History,;Quarterly Review,1841
5. On the Connexion of the Sciences,;Quarterly Review,1834