Advertisement

Transforming Thinking: Can Mach’s Pedagogy Be Replicated?

  • Hayo Siemsen
  • Karl Hayo Siemsen
Chapter
Part of the Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook book series (VCIY, volume 22)

Abstract

In his obituary on Mach, Einstein, (Physikalische Zeitschrift, 1916) asked, “It is difficult – and perhaps also not very important – to answer the question: “What has Mach taught, which was principally new relative to Bacon and Hume?” Mach’s teaching had such an influence on people like Einstein that it fundamentally changed their way of thinking. Is this effect reproducible, and if so, how? For answering this question, one needs to research into the historical-genetic origins of Mach’s erkenntnis-theory and its difference to other erkenntnis-theories, namely Platonism and Pythagoreanism. Mach’s empirical-genetic erkenntnis-theory is the only one consistent with the requirements of evolutionary theory, especially regarding psychology and pedagogy.

References

  1. Bacon, F. (1620/1960). The Great Instauration. The New Organon. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
  2. Beneke, F. E. (1833/1861/1877). Lehrbuch der Psychologie als Naturwissenschaft. Berlin: Mittler.Google Scholar
  3. Beneke, F.E., Erziehungs- und Unterrichtslehre. Erster Band: Erziehungslehre, Ernst-Siegfried Mittler, Berlin, 1835Google Scholar
  4. Beneke, F.E., Erziehungs- und Unterrichtslehre: Zweiter Band: Unterrichtslehre, Ernst-Siegfried Mittler, Berlin, 1836/1842Google Scholar
  5. Beneke, F. E. (1838/2003). Philosophie und Psychologie. Manuscript published by Pettoello, R., Milano: Editioni Universitarie di Lettre Economia Diritto.Google Scholar
  6. Beneke, F. E. (1840). System der Metaphysik und Religionsphilosophie aus den natürlichen Grundverhältnissen des menschlichen Geistes abgeleitet. Berlin: Dümmler.Google Scholar
  7. Beneke, F. E. (1842). System der Logik als Kunstlehre des Denkens. Berlin: Dümmler.Google Scholar
  8. Blackmore, J. T., Itagaki, R., & Tanaka, S. (2009). Ernst Mach’s Influence Spreads. Bethesda, MD: Sentinel Open Press.Google Scholar
  9. Blackmore, J. T., Itagaki, R., & Tanaka, S. (2010a). Ernst Mach’s Graz. Bethesda, MD: Sentinel Open Press.Google Scholar
  10. Blackmore, J. T., Itagaki, R., & Tanaka, S. (2010b). Ernst Mach’s Prague. Bethesda, MD: Sentinel Open Press.Google Scholar
  11. Blackmore, J. T. & Hentschel, K. (1985). Ernst Mach als Aussenseiter. Vienna: Braumüller.Google Scholar
  12. Bolzano, B. (1837). Wissenschaftslehre. Versuch einer ausfuehrlichen und groesstentheils neuen Darstellung der Logik mit steter Ruecksicht auf deren bisherige Bearbeiter. Sulzbach: Seidelsche Buchhandlung.Google Scholar
  13. Broadie, A. (2001/2011). The Scottish Enlightenment. Edinburgh: Birlinn.Google Scholar
  14. Bruner, J. (2004). A Short History of Psychological Theories of Learning. Daedalus 133/1 Winter 2004: 13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carnap, R. The logical structure of the world: pseudoproblems in philosophy, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967Google Scholar
  16. Cole, M. (2000). Bruner and Hybridity. Talk Presented at the Meeting of the American Anthropological Association. San Francisco, Nov. 17th 2000.Google Scholar
  17. Drucker, P. F. (1979). Adventures of a Bystander. Harper & Row: New York.Google Scholar
  18. Ehrenfels, C. von (1890). Über Gestaltqualitäten. Vierteljahresschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie.Google Scholar
  19. Einstein, A. (1916). Ernst Mach. Physikalische Zeitschrift, 17/7, 1st of April: 101–104.Google Scholar
  20. Gaukroger, S. (2001). Francis Bacon and the Transformation of Early-Modern Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Haller, R., Heinrich Gomperz, Karl Popper und die österreichische Philosophie, in: Stadler, F., Seiler, W. (Ed.), Heinrich Gomperz, Karl Popper und die österreichische Philosophie, Amsterdam-Atlanta 1994 (Studien zur österreichischen Philosophie 22), 47–67Google Scholar
  22. Herdan-Zuckmayer, A. (1979/1983). Genies sind im Lehrplan nicht vorgesehen. Fischer: Frankfurt/M.Google Scholar
  23. Hermann, A. (2004). To Think Like God. Pythagoras and Parmenides. The Origins of Philosophy. Las Vegas: Parmenides Publishing.Google Scholar
  24. Hohenester, A. (1988). Ernst Mach als Didaktiker, Lehrbuch- und Lehrplanverfasser. In: Haller, R. & Stadler, F. (Eds.), Ernst Mach Werk und Wirkung. Vienna: Hölder-Pichler-Tempski.Google Scholar
  25. Jaeger, W. (1933/1959). Paideia. Vol. I-III. Berlin: Gruyter. (an English version is available translated from the second edition)Google Scholar
  26. James, W. (1884/1912). Absolutism and Empiricism. In: Essays in Radical Empiricism. New York: Longmans, Green: 266–280.Google Scholar
  27. Kaila, E.: Der logistische Neupositivismus: eine kritische Studie, Turku 1930Google Scholar
  28. Kessler, E. (2011). Alexander of Aphrodisias and his Doctrine of the Soul. 1400 Years of Lasting Significance. Early Science and Medicine 16: 1–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kahn, Ch. H. (1979). The Art and Thought of Heraclitus. An Edition of the Fragments with Translation and Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  30. Kurki-Suonio, K. (2011). Principles Supporting the Perceptional Teaching of Physics: A “Prac-tical Teaching Philosophy”. Science & Education, 20: 211–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kusch, M. (1996). Psychologism. A Case Study in the Sociology of Philosophical Knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Locke, J. (1690/2014). An Essay concerning Human Understanding. Herfordshire: Wordsworth.Google Scholar
  33. Luchins, A. S. & Luchins E. H. (1959). Rigidity of Behavior. A Variational Approach to the Effect of Einstellung. University of Oregon.Google Scholar
  34. Mach, E. (1866). Einleitung in die Helmholtz’sche Musiktheorie – Populär für Musiker dargestellt. Graz: Leuschner & Lubensky.Google Scholar
  35. Mach, E. (1883/1888). Transformation and Adaptation in Scientific Thought. The Open Court: Jul 12 1888, 2/46, APS Online IIA.Google Scholar
  36. Mach, E. (1890). Über das psychologische und logische Moment im Naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht. Zeitschrift für den physikalischen und chemischen Unterricht, 4/1, October 1890: 1–5.Google Scholar
  37. Mach, E. (1896/1923/1987). Populär-wissenschaftliche Vorlesungen. Wien: Böhlau.Google Scholar
  38. Mach, E. (1905/1906/2011). Erkenntnis und Irrtum: Skizzen zur Psychologie der Forschung. Nemeth, E., Stadler, F. (eds.), Ernst Mach Studienausgabe Band 2. Berlin: XENOMOI.Google Scholar
  39. Gemelli Martiano, M. L. (2013). Die Vorsokratiker. Vol. 2. Berlin: Akademie.Google Scholar
  40. Popper. K. R. (1944/1980). Die offene Gesellschaft und ihre Feinde. I, II. Tübingen: Francke.Google Scholar
  41. Semon, R. (1923). Mnemic Psychology. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  42. Shubin, N. (2008/2009). Your Inner Fish. A Journey into the 3.5-Billion-Year History of the Human Body. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  43. Siemsen, H. (2010). The Mach-Planck debate revisited: Democratization of science or elite knowledge? Public Understanding of Science, 19/3: 293–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Siemsen, H. (2011a). Ernst Mach and the Epistemological Ideas Specific for Finnish Science Education. Science & Education, 20: 245–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Siemsen, H. (2011b). John T. Blackmore: Two Recent Trilogies on Ernst Mach. In: McGuinness, B. F. (ed.), Friedrich Waismann. Causality and Logical Positivism. Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook. Vol. 15, Springer: 311–321.Google Scholar
  46. Siemsen, H. (2011c). Mach’s Science Education, the PISA Study and Czech Science Education. In: Mizerova, A. (Ed.) Ernst Mach: Fyzika – Filosofie – Vzdělávání. Brno: Masaryk University Press, in print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Siemsen, H. (2014). Ernst Mach: A Genetic Introduction to His Educational Theory and Pedagogy. In: Matthews, M. (ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching. Vol. III, Springer: Frankfurt (M.).: 2329–2358.Google Scholar
  48. Siemsen, H. (2017a). The Transformation of Mind. Robertson, Beneke, Mach and the Empirical Genetic World View. working paper.Google Scholar
  49. Siemsen, H. (2017b). Plato’s Education for Preventing Thinking. working paper.Google Scholar
  50. Siemsen, H. (2017c). The empirical-genetic world view: Presocratics, Aristotle, Beneke, Mach. working paper.Google Scholar
  51. Siemsen, H. (2017d). Foundations of Mathematics: Intuitionism and the Inconsistency from Parmenides. working paper.Google Scholar
  52. Siemsen, H. (2017e). Mach’s Origins in Beneke and Their Origins in Aristotle vs. Plato. working paper.Google Scholar
  53. Siemsen, H. (2017f). Ernst Mach, Friedrich Eduard Beneke and Kant: Erkenntnis-theory and Education. Presented at the Kant Congress “Nature and Freedom”, Vienna, 21.-25. September 2015, Book of Abstracts, p. 151. In print for the conference proceedings.Google Scholar
  54. Siemsen, H. (2017g). On the Use of Games in Education and Science Education. In R&R.Google Scholar
  55. Siemsen, H. (2017h). Popper falsified. working paper.Google Scholar
  56. Siemsen, H., Reschke, C. H. (2013). Can one learn to think like Drucker? Lessons in personality and management education. Management Research Review 36/8: 767–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Siemsen, H., Testelin, J., Martin-Hansen, L., Siemsen, K. H., Andrieu, B. & Fèvre, J.-M. (2017). An Introduction to A. Binet and V. Vaney on Mental Orthopedics. SpringerBrief Education. In print.Google Scholar
  58. Siemsen, K. H., Schwarz, J. & Siemsen, H. (2014). Mathematische Bildung auf der Fährte der Reproduzierbarkeit. (p. 263–288) and (2014). co-authored by Rabe, D. & Wiebe, J.: An-schauliche Unterweisung mit Spuren von Gestalt. (p. 280–286) In: Gerd-Bodo von Carlsburg, Thomas Vogel (Hrsg./eds.), Bildungswissenschaften und akademisches Selbstver-ständnis in einer globalisierten Welt. Baltische Studien, vol. 28, Lang: Frankfurt.Google Scholar
  59. Speziali, P. (Ed.) (1972). Albert Einstein – Michele Besso: Correspondance. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar
  60. Stadler, F., Studien zum Wiener Kreis : Ursprung, Entwicklung und Wirkung des Logischen Empirismus im Kontext., Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a.M. 1997Google Scholar
  61. Stern, C. (1953). Children Discover Arithmetic. An Introduction to Structural Arithmetic. London: Harrap.Google Scholar
  62. Sterrett, S. G. (1998). Sounds Like Light. Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity and Mach’s Work in Acoustics and Aerodynamics. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 29/1: 1–35.Google Scholar
  63. Thiele, J. (1978). Wissenschaftliche Kommunikation: Die Korrespondenz Ernst Machs. Kastellaun: Henn.Google Scholar
  64. Wittenberg, A. I. (1957). Vom Denken in Begriffen. Mathematik als Experiment des reinen Denkens. Basel: Birkhaeuser.Google Scholar
  65. Woehrle, G. (Ed), Die Milesier: Thales, De Gruyter, Berlin 2009Google Scholar
  66. Zilsel, E. (1924/1990). Die Geniereligion. Ein kritischer Versuch über das moderne Persönlichkeitsideal, mit einer historischen Begründung. Frankfurt (m.): suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  67. Zimmermann, R. (1852). Philosophische Propaedeutik fuer Obergymnasien. Erste Abteilung Empirische Psychologie. Wien: Braunmueller.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hayo Siemsen
    • 1
  • Karl Hayo Siemsen
    • 2
  1. 1.Pädagogische Hochschule HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
  2. 2.Fachhochschule Oldenburg/Ostfriesland/WilhelmshavenWilhelmshavenGermany

Personalised recommendations