Abstract
Using primary sources, the work presents a study on the change in the ontological status of the lines of force in the thought of Michael Faraday (1791–1867), who moves from an instrumentalist to a realist view on this subject. This historical case is then further examined to show the context surrounding his ideas and his reasons justifying them. From this point on, the chapter suggests a reading approach for introducing a philosophical question in the teaching of physics. To this end, it establishes some connections between Faraday’s ideas and students’ views about lines of force, without turning into the criticized parallelism between ontogenesis and phylogenesis. Results from literature, interpreted in the light of Gaston Bachelard’s ideas, indicate the existence of a widespread realist perspective among students. The author suggests that this realism identified in the historical and pedagogical contexts might work as the communication link between reader and text considering the given differences between their contexts.
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
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
Although lines of force do not have the same function as the theoretical terms, which are immediately present in the equations, we consider them here as a kind of “theoretical term,” given their geometrical character, which simply represents an electrostatic or magnetic problem.
- 3.
It should be kept in mind that texts from primary sources do not always constitute a precise account of a scientific process, either because such an account may have been systematized by the author himself or herself, and emphasizes the results, or because he or she avoided publishing partial failures. We do not consider this to be the case with Michael Faraday.
- 4.
From this perspective, categorization is built according to the predicates assigned to the concepts. Certain concepts belong to the category “matter based” if, when the attributes associated with this category are predicated with it, the result is a meaningful sentence, either true or false.
- 5.
Published in three volumes between 1839 and 1855, they consist of 29 series (Faraday [1839–1855] 1952).
- 6.
The essence of this problem lay in the difference in the effects coming from the existence or not of the relative movement between a copper plate and a magnetic needle suspended close to it: although rotation of one determined the movement of the other, the absence of relative movement between them did not produce any effect at all, neither attraction nor repulsion.
- 7.
Although today, from a conceptual point of view, we would not affirm that a “small magnetic needle would form a tangent” to the lines at different points, but rather understand that the tangent to a line of force gives the direction of the magnetic field.
- 8.
- 9.
Although decisive for the evolution of the concept of lines of force, this period is not taken into consideration in the research of Pocoví and Finley (2002).
- 10.
In spite of the fact that Faraday explicitly ascribes this model to Boscovich (Ruggiero Giuseppe Boscovich, 1711–1787), several authors challenge this source, which triggered a historiographical problem that is beyond the scope of this chapter and, therefore, is not discussed here.
- 11.
For Williams, Faraday’s presentation and defense of his theoretical conceptions in this particular period owes much to the fact that his long career of experimental discoveries was finished in around 1850. This does not mean that the scientist abandoned the experimental approach, “but his experiments were now overtly the ammunition with which he supported theoretical positions taken up publicly and in print. His purpose was nothing less than to supply a general view of the modes of action of force” (Williams 1965, p. 445).
- 12.
The association between lines of force and the phenomenon of radiation is not accepted any longer; according to present understanding, light rays are a geometric resource that gives us the direction of the propagation of the wave fronts.
- 13.
Faraday’s explicit proposal that the lines exist independently of a “succession of particles” leads us to disagree with Pocoví and Finley, for whom the fact that the lines represent “a way of filling the space between the intervening charges or poles” “show his deep philosophical commitment to the idea of contiguous action” (2002, p. 472).
- 14.
We do not find it necessary here to look further at the theory of Chi et al. (1994), already mentioned in note 4 above, and the category of “matter-based” derived from it. For an explanation of its use in this context, see Pocoví (2007, p. 108). As our purpose is not to propose a method of conceptual change, it suffices to take as well grounded the statement that there is attribution of materiality to the lines by the students.
- 15.
Povocí’s (2007) research used material from the history of science and was aimed at testing its effect on the way in which students learn the concept of lines of force as a geometrical entity, although avoiding the extensive use of exact citations from primary sources “because most of the times they are not easy to understand” (Pocoví 2007, p. 116).
- 16.
We believe, however, that our “innate philosophy” and its requirement of realism should be added to the conditions that he presents as the foundations of these conceptions, i.e., “images imposed by culture, media, and other social representations of science” (Kampourakis 2016, p. 2).
- 17.
- 18.
In current terms, his thought would resemble the trend of realism that affirms it to be possible to know reality at both observable and non-observable levels. In other words, true theories may refer to both observable and non-observable things and the relationships between them. Being so, it is assumed that theoretical terms in physics can refer to entities, which, although not directly observed, exist, in fact, in the physical world. For a summary of the varieties of realism, see Niiniluoto (1999). For an example of a view according to which we should be realist in relation to both the observable and the non-observable entities, see Devitt (1997); and for a presentation of epistemological realism illustrated with examples from the history of science, see Matthews (1994, chapter 8).
References
Bachelard, G. ([1934] 1967). La formation de l’esprit scientifique. Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin.
Bachelard, G. ([1940] 1966). La philosophie du non. Paris: Les Presses Universitaires de France.
Chi, M. T. H., Slotta, J. D., & de Leeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 4, 27–43.
Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2016). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: Why does it matter? Science Education, 25, 147–164.
Devitt, M. (1997). Realism and truth. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Faraday, M. ([1839–1855] 1952). Experimental researches in electricity. In Great books of the western world: Lavoisier, Fourier, Faraday, Robert Maynard Hutchins (pp. 255–898). Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica.
Fisher, H. J. (2001). Faraday’s experimental researches in electricity: Guide to a first reading. Santa Fe: Green Lyon Press.
Heimann, P. M. (1971). Faraday’s theories of matter and electricity. British Journal for the History of Science, 5, 235–257.
Heimann, P. M., & McGuire, J. E. (1971). Newtonian forces and Lockean powers: Concepts of matter in eighteenth century thought. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 3, 233–306.
Höttecke, D., & Silva, C. C. (2011). Why implementing history and philosophy in school science education is a challenge: An analysis of obstacles. Science Education, 20, 293–316.
Kampourakis, K. (2016). (The) nature(s) of science(s) and (the) scientific method(s). Science Education, 2, 1–2.
Klein, M. J. (1972). Use and abuse of historical teaching in physics. In S. G. Brush & A. L. King (Eds.), History in the teaching of physics (pp. 12–18). Hanover: University Press of New England.
Levere, T. H. (1968). Faraday, matter and natural theology: Reflections on an unpublished manuscript. British Journal for the History of Science, 4, 95–97.
Matthews, M. R. (1988). A role for history and philosophy in science teaching. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 20(2), 67–81.
Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
Niiniluoto, I. (1999). Critical scientific realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pocoví, M. C. (2007). The effects of a history-based instructional material on the students’ understanding of field lines. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 107–132.
Pocoví, M. C., & Finley, F. (2002). Lines of force: Faraday’s and students’ views. Science & Education, 11, 459–474.
Russell, C. (1984). Whigs and professionals. Nature, 308, 777–778.
Teixeira, E. S., Greca, I. M., & Jr, O. F. (2012). The history and philosophy of science in physics teaching: A research synthesis of didactic interventions. Science Education, 21, 771–796.
Whitaker, R. J. M. A. B. (1979). History and quasi-history in physics education, Parts I, II. Physics Education, 14(108–112), 239–242.
Williams, L. P. (1965). Michael Faraday. New York: Basic Books.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dion, S.M. (2018). The Status of the Lines of Force in Michael Faraday’s Thought: History and Philosophy of Science in the Classroom. In: Prestes, M., Silva, C. (eds) Teaching Science with Context. Science: Philosophy, History and Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74036-2_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74036-2_22
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74035-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-74036-2
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)