Styles of Experimentation

  • Ursula Klein
Part of the Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science book series (BSPS, volume 237)


Experimental Analysis Eighteenth Century Experimental Culture Conceptual System Scientific Object 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bacon, F. 1879. Works. J. Spedding, R. L. Ellis, and D. D. Heath (eds.), vol. 4. London: Longmans & Co.Google Scholar
  2. Boerhaave, H. 1741. New Method of Chemistry. Including the History, Theory, and Practice of the Art. Translated from the Original Latin of Dr. Boerhaave’s Elementa Chemiae, as published by himself. To which are added notes, and an appendix, showing the necessity and utility of enlarging the bounds of chemistry (P. Shaw, Trans.). London: T. Longman.Google Scholar
  3. Christie, M. 1994. “Philosophers versus Chemists Concerning ‘Laws of Nature’”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 25: 613–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Galison, P. 1987. How Experiments End. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  5. Galison, P. 1997. Image and Logic: A Material Culture of Microphysics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Geoffroy, E. F. 1718. “Table des differentes rapports observés en Chimie entre differentes substances”. Histoire de l’Académie Royale des Sciences: Avec des Mémoires de Mathématique & de Physique pour la même Année, Mémoires, pp. 202–212.Google Scholar
  7. Goodman, N. 1997. “Sense and certainty”. In C. Z. Elgin (ed.), Nominalism, Constructivism, and Relativism in the Work of Nelson Goodman. Vol. 1. New York: Garland Publishers, pp. 120–127.Google Scholar
  8. Hacking, I. 1983. Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hacking, I. 1992a. “The Self-Vindication of the Laboratory Sciences”. In A. Pickering (ed.), Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 29–64.Google Scholar
  10. Hacking, I. 1992b. “’style’ for Historians and Philosophers”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 23: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hacking, I. 1992c. “Statistical language, statistical truth, and statistical reason: The self-authentification of a style of scientific reasoning”. In E. McMullin (ed.), The Social Dimensions of Science. Vol. 3. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, pp. 130–157.Google Scholar
  12. Heidelberger, M., & Steinle, F. (eds.) 1998. Experimental Essays — Versuche zum Experiment. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  13. Holmes, F. L. 1989. Eighteenth-Century Chemistry as an Investigative Enterprise. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  14. Jardine, N., Secord, J. A., & Spary, E. C. (eds.) 1996. Cultures of Natural History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Klein, U. 1994a. Verbindung und Affinität: Die Grundlegung der neuzeitlichen Chemie an der Wende vom 17. zum 18. Jahrhundert. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
  16. Klein, U. 1994b. “Origin of the Concept of Chemical Compound”. Science in Context 7: 163–204.Google Scholar
  17. Klein, U. 1995. “E. F. Geoffroy’s Table of Different ‘Rapports’ Observed between Different Chemical Substances — A Reinterpretation”. Ambix 42: 79–100.Google Scholar
  18. Klein, U. 1996. “The Chemical Workshop Tradition and the Experimental Practice — Discontinuities within Continuities”. Science in Context 9: 251–287.Google Scholar
  19. Klein, U. 2001a. “Paper Tools in Experimental Cultures”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 32: 265–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Klein, U. 2001b. “Berzelian Formulas as Paper Tools in Early Nineteenth-Century Chemistry”. Foundations of Chemistry 3: 7–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Klein, U. (ed.) 2001c. Tools and Modes of Representation in the Laboratory Sciences (Vol. 222). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  22. Klein, U. 2002. Experiments, Models, Paper Tools: Cultures of Organic Chemistry in the Nineteenth Century. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Latour, B. 1987. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Latour, B. 1990. “Drawing Things Together”. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (eds.), Representation in Scientific Practice. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, pp. 19–68.Google Scholar
  25. Latour, B. 1999. Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. 1986. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Pickering, A. 1995. The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  28. Rheinberger, H.-J. 1995. “From Experimental Systems to Cultures of Experimentation”. In G. Wolters & J. G. Lennox (eds.), Concepts, Theories and Rationality in the Biological Sciences: The Second Pittsburgh-Konstanz Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science; University ofPittsburgh, October 1–4, 1993. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 107–121.Google Scholar
  29. Rheinberger, H.-J. 1997. Toward a History ofEpistemic Things: Synthesizing Proteins in the Test Tube. Stanford: Standford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Rocke, A. J. 1984. Chemical Atomism in the Nineteenth Century: From Dalton to Cannizzaro. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Shapin, S. & Schaffer, S. 1985. Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Steinle, F. 1997. “Entering New Fields: Exploratory Uses of Experimentation”. Philosophy of Science 64(Supplement): S65–S74.Google Scholar
  33. Steinle, F. 1998. “Exploratives vs. theoriebestimmtes Experimentieren: Ampères erste Arbeiten zum Elektromagnetismus”. In M. Heidelberger & F. Steinle (eds.), Experimental Essays — Versuche zum Experiment. Baden-Baden: Nomos-Verlag, pp. 272–297.Google Scholar
  34. Steinle, F. 2001. “‘Das Nächste ans Nächste reihen’: Goethe, Newton und das Experiment”. Preprint series. Vol. 169. Berlin: Max-Planck-Institut für Wissenschaftsgeschichte.Google Scholar
  35. Stroup, A. 1990. A Company of Scientists: Botany, Patronage, and Community at the Seventeenth-Century Parisian Royal Academy of Science. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ursula Klein
    • 1
  1. 1.Max Planck Institute for the History of ScienceBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations