Abstract
Today, there is a large consensus in science, politics and society about the relevance and necessity for advancing gender equality. Despite increased measures and initiatives for gender-appropriate research and teaching and for funding programs, women are still strongly underrepresented in science. The number of women in philosophy of science is conspicuously low. While gender and diversity issues are at the top of the agenda in other sciences, disciplines, and scientific cultures, and gender research has long since found its way into practice, there is a considerable research deficit in philosophy of science vis-à-vis such approaches, apart from a few critical voices from feminist science studies. The aim of this chapter is to provide guidance on how to make women’s participation in research visible from a historical, constructive, and systematic point of view by using selected examples from philosophy and history of physics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
If not otherwise noted the translations are my own. A translation different from the one proposed here can be found in Zinsser and Bour (2009, 177).
Bibliography
Bell, J. S. (1966). On the problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. Reviews of Modern Physics, 38(3), 447–452.
Coelho, R. L. (2007). The law of inertia: How understanding its history can improve physics teaching. Science & Education, 16(9–10), 955–974.
Crull, E., & Bacciagaluppi, G. (Eds.). (2016). Grete Hermann. Between physics and philosophy. Springer.
Densmore, D. (1995). Newton's Principia: The central argument. Translation, notes, and expanded proofs. Green Lion Press.
Dieks, D. (2016). Von Neumann’s impossibility proof: Mathematics in the service of rhetorics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 60, 136–148.
Du Châtelet, É. (1759). Newton, Isaac: Principes mathématiques de la philosophie naturelle par feue madame la marquise Du Chastellet. Desaint et Saillant.
Du Châtelet, É. (1988). Institutions physiques de Madame la marquise du Châstellet adressés à Mr. son fils. Hildesheim et al.: Olms (First published 1742)
Einstein, A. (1905). Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper. Annalen der Physik, 322(10), 891–921.
Einstein, A. (1911). Die Relativitätstheorie. Vortrag in Zürich, 16. Januar 1911. Naturforschende Gesellschaft in Zürich. Vierteljahrsschrift, 56(1–2), 1–14.
Einstein, A. (1918). Dialog über die Einwände gegen die Relativitätstheorie. Die Naturwissenschaften, 48, 697–702.
Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., & Rosen, N. (1935). Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Physical Review, 47, 777–780.
Hankins, T. L. (1990). Jean D’Alembert. Science and the enlightenment. Taylor & Francis.
Hermann, G. (1935). Die naturphilosophischen Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik. Abhandlungen der Fries’schen Schule N.F., 6(2), 75–152.
Jammer, M. (1974). The philosophy of quantum mechanics. The interpretations of quantum mechanics in historical perspective. Wiley.
Lange, L. (1927a). The clock paradox in the theory of relativity. The American Mathematical Monthly, 34, 22–30.
Lange, L. (1927b). On a misconception of the relativity of time. School Science and Mathematics, 27(5), 500–506.
Langevin, P. (1911). L’évolution de lespace et du temps. Scientia, 19(3), 31–54.
McCulloch, M. E. (2014). Physics from the edge: A new cosmological model for inertia. World Scientific.
Mermin, N. D., & Schack, R. (2018). Homer nodded: Von Neumann’s surprising oversight. Foundations of Physics, 48(9), 1007–1020.
Newton, I. (1972). Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica. 3rd ed., with variant readings. 2 vols., A. Koyré & I. B. Cohen (Ed.). Cambridge University Press. (First published 1726).
O’Donnell, P. J. (2014). Essential dynamics and relativity. CRC Press.
Reichenberger, A. (2018a, June). Émilie Du Châtelet’s interpretation of the laws of motion in the light of 18th century mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 69, 1–11.
Reichenberger, A. (2018b). The clock paradox: Luise Lange’s discussion. In A. Christian, D. Hommen, N. Retzlaff & G. Schurz (Eds.), Philosophy of science: Between the natural science, the social sciences, and the humanities (pp. 55–61). Springer.
von Laue, M. (1912). Zwei Einwände gegen die Relativitätstheorie und ihre Widerlegung. Physikalische Zeitschrift, 13, 118–120.
von Neumann, J. (1932). Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik. Springer.
Zinsser, J. P., & Bour, I. (2009). Emilie Du Châtelet. Selected philosophical and scientific writings. University of Chicago Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Reichenberger, A. (2023). A Case Study in Diversifying History and Philosophy of Physics: Teaching Émilie Du Châtelet’s, Luise Lange and Grete Hermann. In: Harry, C.C., Vlahakis, G.N. (eds) Exploring the Contributions of Women in the History of Philosophy, Science, and Literature, Throughout Time. Women in the History of Philosophy and Sciences, vol 20. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39630-4_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39630-4_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-39629-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-39630-4
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)