Well, and Pragmatism?

Abstract

Michael Heidelberger suggests that “we are witness today of a renewed interest in the history of philosophy of science, especially of the 19th century”. This statement involves a broad historical perspective and asks not only that we take a deeper look into the philosophy of science of the age of Helmholtz and Mach, of Poincaré and Hertz, but also that we consider them and other leading figures of the time in the context – as Heidelberger correctly says – of national traditions (such as that of France or even Italy) and within a more articulated historical background.1 I agree in particular with the proposal for “comparative studies in the history of philosophy of science”. The transfer of ideas from one country to another during the 19th century represents a crucial historical issue for our research and may contribute to a new interpretation of the history of philosophy of science, not only during the “long century”, but also in regard to the “short” one, i.d. looking forward – broadly speaking – to our present debates and our philosophical agendas.