On the interpretation of nature (1754)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bust of Denis Diderots by Jean Baptiste Pigalle , (1777)
Title page from the Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature , Amsterdam (1754) by Denis Diderot

As a result of the examination of the scientific methodological and philosophical problems of his time, Denis Diderot published the first version of his monograph in 1753 under the title On the Interpretation of Nature (the original title was De l'interprétation de la nature in French ). In the spring of 1754 a second version of the Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature or Thoughts on the Interpretation of Nature (1754) was written. In his monographs, he stated at the beginning that the natural sciences would overcome the state of an exclusive predominance of a single mathematical-physical worldview. Other important writings that deal with the complex of topics about nature are set down in Le rêve de D'Alembert (1769) and the Éléments de physiologie (1773–1774).

General and Influences

At the beginning of the Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature , Diderot put a quote from the work De rerum natura by the Roman poet and philosopher Titus Lucretius Carus, known as Lucretius for short . A didactic poem by the Roman Epicurean , in which the idea was formulated that all perceptible things can be ascribed to the smallest "atoms". Lucretius saw the indispensable “emptiness” between the atoms as a prerequisite for a development, because it was only through this that “movement” was possible. For what the world is, or for the creation of the world, Lucretius assumed the movement of the atoms as decisive. Diderot also sees the movement of matter as a decisive agent of becoming.

But it was also the idea that understood nature as a comprehensive mechanical system and made it function according to exact laws . The exclusive idea of ​​the quantifiability of nature has led to a loss of qualitative diversity. It was a plea for the principle of experiment in the sense of Francis Bacon Experimental Philosophy and against the rational explanations of nature of the Cartésiens, that is, the rationalistic thinkers in the wake of René Descartes . For Bacon, falsifying ideas ( idols ) of a knowledge of nature stood in the way of knowing people as an obstacle, as set out in De verulamio novum organum scientiarum from the year (1620). In order to arrive at true knowledge, the true insight into the nature of things, the knower must dissolve the illusions by means of induction . The induction should be carried out according to plan, with orderly perceptions and targeted experiments. Incidentally, Francis Bacon's work, similar to Diderot's monograph, was essentially determined by numbered aphorisms that emphasize the need for impartial scientific knowledge.

In contrast to Francis Bacon, the consistent empiricist , who also rejected intuition and the inference by analogy as sources for knowledge, Denis Diderot emphasized these cognitive techniques as important approaches. From the experiences gathered (observation), through a selective compilation or new combination, the empirical contents become hypotheses (reflection), the informational value of which is confirmed or negated by testing in the experiment (experiment). One therefore only arrives at the truth when perceptual contents come from the senses to the reflection and via the reflection and the experiment to the senses again. For Diderot, knowledge is a permanent in and out of oneself; compare also falsification . Diderot shows here a certain proximity to the ideas of Francis Bacon, for whom real knowledge is the real representation of nature, without falsifying ideas or idols, but goes a step beyond this by assigning greater importance to the aspect of reflection or hypothesis formation, but which would have to prove itself in an attempt.

With Georges-Louis Leclerc de Buffon the following correspondences can be seen in the view of the theory of nature; de Buffon, a scientist and writer, also opposes a purely Cartesian and mathematical conception of science.

The Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature were Denis Diderot's first coherent scientific work. In dealing with the positions around de Buffon or de Maupertuis , Diderot also dissolved the previously clearly drawn borderline between vegetable and animal nature, but pulled the bow even further, so that he finally saw no more fundamental distinction between animate and inanimate matter . Finally, Diderot also uses a step-shaped development model as a basis (cf. the Aristotelian idea of ​​a Scalae Naturae ) and by taking up de Maupertuis' idea from his Essai sur la formation des corps organisés (1754), the molecules of matter already become a sensibility awarded. Although not in the mature conceptualization of a sensibilité universelle , as it was formulated in the years between 1754 and 165, but still in the conceptual reference to the scholastic term ame sensitive . In this way, however, he increasingly succeeds in closing the arc of the idea of ​​moving and developing from inorganic, inanimate to organic, animate matter.

Authorship and Reception

The first version of the philosophical work was published in 1753 and documented the beginning of his friendship between himself and the encyclopedist and mathematician Jean-Baptiste le Rond d'Alembert as a result of differing philosophical views. So he reached into his monograph the mathematics and thus indirectly the attitude of d'Alembert that the most important science is mathematics, because these would be applicable to all other disciplines science. He rejected the efforts of leading mathematicians, including d'Alembert, to abstract problems more and more and instead demanded that utility should be the first criterion of any science. According to Diderot's prediction, mathematics would be a dead science for the next hundred years.

In his opinion, chemistry, (experimental) physics and biology were the real promising sciences. Diderot gained direct experience with the chemistry of his time. From 1754 to 1757 he regularly attended the lectures and experimental courses of Guillaume-François Rouelle in the Jardin du Roi . He consulted Georges-Louis Leclerc de Buffon on questions related to biology.

construction

The work is divided into two parts, the first part with the title heading "To the young men that were in the study of natural philosophy decide" Aux jeunes gens qui se disposent à l'étude de la philosophie naturelle is followed by more than illiterate, aphorisms like portions of I to XXIII . Section XXIV was again given a heading "Outline of experimental physics", Esquisse de la physique expérimentale , and sections from XXV to XXXI now follow again without a heading . The next sections from XXXII to XXXVII , are titled as "Examples First Series of Conjectures" to the sixth series of Conjectures, Exemples (Conjectures de I à VIII) . Then from XXXVIII to L further sections without headings , from LIV "From the choice of objects", De la distinction des objets LV "From the obstacles", Des obstacles LVI a "From the causes", Des causes. LVI b "From the last causes", Des causes finales LVII "From some prejudices", De quelques pré jugés. and LVIII "Questions", Questions. and finally "prayer" Prière . Then the second part without any further subdivisions "Philosophical principles about matter and movement", Principes philosophiques sur la materière et le mouvement.

The "prayer" Prière, which can be found in the contemporary editions at the end of the monograph, was included in the work from 1773 in the Collection complette des œuvres philosophiques, littéraires et dramatiques . The authorship of Denis Diderot has been questioned several times.

Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature (1754) // Thoughts on the interpretation of nature (1754)
First part Aux jeunes gens qui se disposent à l'étude de la philosophie naturelle. To the youngsters who decide to study natural philosophy.
I to XXIII "Sections" "aphorism-like sections"
XXIV Esquisse de la physique expérimentale. Experimental physics floor plan.
XXV to XXXI "Sections" "aphorism-like sections"
XXXII to XXXVII Examples (Conjectures de I à VIII). Examples (series of conjectures I to VIII).
XXXVIII to L "Sections" "aphorism-like sections"
LI De l'impulsion d'une sensation. Via the impulse to a sensation.
LII Of instruments et des mesures. Instruments and measures.
LIII "Section" "aphorism-like section"
LIV De la distinction des objets. From the choice of objects.
LV The obstacle. From the obstacles.
LVI a The cause. From the causes.
LVI b The cause's final. From the ultimate causes.
LVII De quelques préjugés. Some prejudices.
LVIII Questions. Ask.
Prière. prayer
Second part Principes philosophiques sur la materière et le mouvement. Philosophical principles about matter and movement.

content

Portrait of Denis Diderot (1713–1784), chalk drawing from 1766 by Jean-Baptiste Greuze

In his Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature, Diderot outlines a methodology which , based on the observation of the tangible reality , sets up temporary hypotheses , which in turn should be the starting point for further scientific questions . For Diderot, nature as a whole was an unlimited and all-enabling world of transitions and metamorphoses, all of which take place in limitless periods of time. He saw the cognitive process as an interaction between observation , combined reflection and experiment.

The world was in principle for him recognizable , agnostic attitudes he did not share. In this sense he was an empiricist . Similar to the considerations of Francis Bacon , John Locke or Étienne Bonnot de Condillac, he attributed knowledge to the experience of sensory impressions . The ideas were then generated from their processing . Processing and comparing these sensory impressions require a memory. Diderot sees another ability in the imagination .

His Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature also included a critical appraisal of the philosophical positions of Pierre-Louis Moreau de Maupertuis , who wrote his views in the Système de la nature ou Essai sur les corps organisés - initially in 1751 as a dissertation in Latin inauguralis metaphysica de universali naturae systemate and under the pseudonym Dr. Baumann - published and who had dealt there with Leibniz's theory of monads and their significance for natural philosophy .

But he also referred to the work of Georges-Louis Leclerc de Buffon and Louis Jean-Marie Daubenton in their “General and Special History of Nature”, Histoire naturelle générale et particulière ( 1749 ), and linked their results with his reflections .

This in a sense aphorisms like , in short articles, structured text puts the knowledge three tools as a basis, nature observation, reflection and scientific experiment. In this approach he was linked to the philosophy of John Locke and Isaac Newton , see Article XV

"One focus of the methodology designed by Diderot in the Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature is to set up provisional hypotheses based on the observation of empirical reality , which should be the starting point for new scientific questions and research objects, but always explicitly as approximate , as to be set again by research. The same relative claim to validity also applies to Diderot's philosophical theories, which are supposed to offer an overall draft as a synthesis of the research results of the natural sciences, but again, in accordance with the always open progress of the sciences, may only be stops of thought, never endpoints. [...] An essential feature of the method postulated by Diderot for natural research consists in the value of the hypotheses, the overall theories, even the speculations in relation to that of Newton's postulate ' Hypotheses non fingo ' [means: in experimental philosophy there are no assumptions] to rehabilitate the thought model of his contemporaries, to place the hypotheses in a methodical context with observation and experiment. "

- Ursula Winter : Scientific methodology and morals

At the beginning of the interpretations Diderot put a quote from the work De rerum natura by Titus Lucretius Carus, called Lucretius for short .

“(…) Quæ sunt in luce tuemur E tenebris. Lucret. De Rerum natura, lib. VI. "

(Translation from Latin: out of the darkness we see what light is. ) Diderot changed the original quote from the Epicurean poet-philosopher, because the original text reads E tenebris autem quae sunt in luce tuemur . So what is at the beginning of Lucretius is placed at the end of the sentence in Diderot. By rearranging the hypotactically structured statement, an accentuation of the meaningful content that differs from the original by Lucretius is created . Whereas the one in this allegory emphasizes that one can see out of darkness what light is; Diderot comes to the interpretation that light or the fact that the object to be viewed is illuminated is a prerequisite for seeing .

In Article XXIV, Outline of Experimental Physics , Diderot names and describes its scope and tasks "(...) experimental physics is generally concerned with existence, properties and use" and subsequently defines these and other terms derived from them. In Article XXIII he differentiates the types of philosophy, "(...) We have distinguished two types of philosophy: experimental and rational philosophy. (...)". In the following article a synthetic conclusion was sought from both aphorisms. From Article XXXI , examples and assumptions derived from them are formulated. Experimental philosophy would be the philosophy based, so to speak, on experience.

In 1749 the already mentioned philosophical writing Lettre sur les aveugles ("Letter about the blind") came out, in which Diderot, based on the thesis that someone born blind has no possibility of conceiving the existence of God, doubts his existence at all. In 1751 he contributed to a foundation of philosophical aesthetics with the Lettre sur les sourds et muets ("Letter about the deaf and dumb"). In the same year he was admitted to the Berlin Academy of Sciences alongside d'Alembert .

Biological aspects

Diderot wrote in his monograph under LVIII questions :

“(...) In the animal and plant kingdom an individual takes a beginning, so to speak, grows, lasts, decays and passes away. Shouldn't it be the same with whole species? "

- Denis Diderot : On the interpretation of nature

In his particularly philosophical writings, Diderot was downright enthusiastic about the idea of ​​development, an idea that embraced the entire universe. All life arises from the material substrate. Matter can therefore also be living matter, which is able to develop something living and feeling, but without assuming a final causality in this development or production . The ultimately inaccessibility of this finality also shows the human inability to understand nature according to its own standards, in the assumption that this inadequacy also contains the prohibition to subsume nature under the reason and will of a god . God would thus be thought of as a human being increased to infinity. Nature is the whole, from which all life emerges, the whole has a temporal sequence, a development, so that being comes into a flow of time. He saw in matter the substance of becoming, but rather less concretized than, for example, with his friend Paul Henri Thiry d'Holbach , although his interpretation of nature is supposed to be scientifically and hypothetically founded, it was also a draft filled with feeling and imagination.

A draft that was requested in a similar way by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe in German-speaking countries .

Sections I to XV

Both the explanations of the individual sections and the information on the page numbers will refer to the German translation by Eckart Richter from 1967.

In Section I, Diderot outlined the field of his reflections.

"I want to write about nature here. (...) p. 27"

and immediately explained his approach

"(...) let the thoughts flow in the same order in which the objects present themselves to my reflection. (...) pp. 27-28"

In Section II and later in XII he made reference to the important work of Georges-Louis Leclerc de Buffon and Louis Jean-Marie Daubenton of the "General and Special History of Nature", Histoire naturelle générale et particulière (1749) which him in his views influenced. In section II he continues with his fundamental criticism of a single mathematically founded description of reality . An exclusively mathematical description of nature has only little knowledge value . The mathematician who tried to convert the abundance of facts of nature or reality into a network of mathematical methods and concepts would create a reality that resembled a general metaphysics .

In Section VII he dealt with the problem of concept formation , the questions of acquiring knowledge through induction or deduction , he wrote

“As long as things only exist in our minds, they are our views, that is, concepts that can be true or false, recognized or contested. They gain constancy only when they come into contact with things outside of us. This connection is established either through an uninterrupted chain of experiences - or through an uninterrupted chain of rational conclusions, which are linked on the one hand to observation and on the other to experience, or finally through a chain of experiences which are inserted at certain intervals between rational conclusions (...) p. 32 "

In section IX he suggests that human reflection is not yet able to understand

“(...) how strict the laws of research into truth are and how limited the number of our resources is. It all boils down to coming back from the senses to reflection and from reflection to the senses. (...) p. 33 "

Diderot sees intuition and analogy thinking as important tools for understanding nature. It contradicts a purely empirical conception of the explanation of nature, insofar as it assumes the necessity of hypotheses in the sense of intuition, i.e. the intuitive knowledge of nature on the one hand in interaction with observation and experiment on the other. In Section XV he wrote:

“We have three main means: observation of nature, reflection and experiment. Observation collects the facts; reflection combines them; the experiment tests the result of the combination. The observation of nature must be incessant, the reflection deep and the experiment precise. (...) p. 27 "

In the aphorism of section XXIII, Diderot differentiates between a philosophically rational methodology based on philosophical speculation and a philosophie expérimentale methodology that is committed to empirical factual research. To this end, he tried to create the image of a blindfolded, groping person who discovered his surroundings.

“We distinguished two types of philosophy: experimental and rational philosophy. One has a bandage in front of her eyes, moves forward only groping, grasps everything that comes into her hands, and finally finds valuable things. The other gathers these valuable substances and tries to make a torch out of them; but this alleged torch has been of less use to her than to her rival by touching it, and this could not be otherwise. (...) Experimental philosophy does not know what will come of its work; but she works incessantly. Rational philosophy, on the other hand, ponders the possibilities, decides and suddenly stops. She boldly claims: 'You can't split light.' Experimental philosophy listens and is silent about it for centuries; then suddenly she shows her the prism and says: 'The light can be dismantled.' P. 41 "

In Sections XIV to XXV he repeatedly pointed out the importance of intuition and the conclusion by analogy for the knowledge of nature. On the basis of both "philosophies" he showed the inadequacies in the methodologies , for example the speculative approach of the philosophie rationelle with its conceptualizations irrelevant for an exact nature research is as useless as the actionism of unprepared, haphazard experimentation, manouvrier d'expérience . Only the natural scientist who combines the ability to construct an overall theory of the corresponding natural phenomenon from individual observations and the intuitive understanding of larger relationships is able to do this.

Résumé

For Diderot, natural science was characterized by the fact that it did not ask why , but rather that it should find an answer to the question of how . Science was thus the method that prevented people from giving themselves up in deception and self-deception , be it by themselves or by the other.

See also

expenditure

Contemporary

  • Pensées l'interprétation de la nature . Amsterdam (?) 1754 ( online )
  • Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature . London 1770 ( archive.org ).

Translations

  • Denis Diderot: On the interpretation of nature. Preface by Eckart Richter. Verlag Philipp Reclam jun., Leipzig (1967)
  • Denis Diderot: Philosophical Writings. Edited by Theodor Lücke. Verlag das Europäische Buch, Berlin 1984, ISBN 3-88436-509-6 , pp. 417-471

literature

Web links

Wikisource: Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature  - Sources and full texts (French)

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Diderot, Denis (1713-1784). Gallica. Oeuvres complètes de Diderot: rev. sur les éd. original comprenant ce qui a été publié à Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature.
  2. ↑ Wikisource Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature.
  3. ↑ Denis Diderot: On the interpretation of nature. Preface by Eckart Richter. Publishing house Philipp Reclam jun., Leipzig 1967
  4. ↑ The "Experimental Philosophy": Francis Bacon (1561–1626 AD) , p. 5, online ( Memento of the original of September 4, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 90 kB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.phas.ubc.ca
  5. ↑ Soren Preibusch: Diderot: Pensées sur l'interprétation de la nature core theses based on selected passages. Seminar Philosophy and Technology in the Encyclopédie. 24.11.204 Ursula Winter (PDF; 45 kB)
  6. ^ Novum organum scientiarum . Typis G. Girardi, Venetiis 1762, archive.org
  7. ^ Lilo K. Luxembourg: Francis Bacon and Denis Diderot: Philosophers of Science. Munksgaard, Copenhagen 1967
  8. ↑ The term experiment is used differently by Francis Bacon than in modern parlance. See Lisa Jardine : Francis Bacon: Discovery and the Art of Discourse. Cambridge University Press, 1975, ISBN 0-521-20494-1 , pp. 136-137.
  9. ↑ Peter-Eckhard Knabe (Ed.): France in the Age of Enlightenment. dme-Verlag, Cologne 1985, ISBN 3-922977-15-4 , p. 133.
  10. ↑ Frank Baasner: The term 'sensibilité' in the 18th century. The rise and fall of an ideal. Studia Romanica. 69. Carl Winter, Heidelberg 1988, ISBN 3-533-03965-X , p. 268.
  11. ^ Kristin Reichel: Diderot's draft of a materialistic moral philosophy (1745–1754). Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2012, ISBN 978-3-8260-4940-8 , pp. 342–392.
  12. ↑ Denis Diderot: Collection complete des œuvres philosophiques, littéraires et dramatiques . 1773, archive.org
  13. ↑ Helmut Holzhey, Vilem Mudroch, Friedrich Ueberweg, Johannes Rohbeck: Outline of the history of philosophy: The philosophy of the 18th century. 2 half volumes. Schwabe-Verlag, Basel 2008, ISBN 978-3-7965-2445-5 , p. 529.
  14. ^ Dietrich Harth; Martin Raether: Denis Diderot or the ambivalence of the Enlightenment. Königshausen and Neumann, Würzburg 1987, ISBN 3-88479-277-6 , pp. 157-184.
  15. ↑ Helmut Holzhey, Vilem Mudroch, Friedrich Ueberweg, Johannes Rohbeck: Outline of the history of philosophy: The philosophy of the 18th century. 2 half floors. Schwabe-Verlag, Basel 2008, ISBN 978-3-7965-2445-5 , pp. 519-546.
  16. ↑ Silvio Vietta: European cultural history: An introduction. W. Fink, Paderborn 2007, ISBN 978-3-8252-8346-9 , p. 369.
  17. ^ Marie-Luise Roy: The Poetics of Denis Diderot. Wilhelm Fink Verlag, Munich 1966, p. 18
  18. ↑ Charles T. Wolfe: Endowed molecules and emergent organization: the Maupertuis-Diderot debate. In: Early Sci Med. 2010; 15 (1-2), pp. 38-65.
  19. ↑ Ursula Winter: The materialism in Diderot. Librairie Droz, Genève 1972, ISBN 2-600-03851-5 .
  20. ↑ In 1713 Newton wrote a letter to Roger Cotes

    "(...) Experimental philosophy proceeds only upon Phenomena and deduces general Propositions from them only by Induction. (...) Sir Isaac Newton (Author), J. Edleston (Edleston): Correspondence of Sir Isaac Newton and Professor Cotes. 1850, Reprint: Rough Draft Printing, 2012, ISBN 1-6038-6450-4 , p. 156 "

  21. ↑ Denis Diderot: On the interpretation of nature. Verlag Philipp Reclam jun., Leipzig 1967, p. 38.
  22. ↑ Scientific methodology and morality. In: Dietrich Harth, Martin Raether (Ed.): Denis Diderot or the ambivalence of the Enlightenment. Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1987, ISBN 3-88479-277-6 , pp. 157-184
  23. ↑ Epicurus' theory of nature "physics" is based on three fundamental assumptions: a) Nothing can arise from what is nothing; b) Nothing can pass into that which is nothing; c) All is constant, just as it is and will always be . These assumptions suggest a materialistic view of nature.
  24. ^ Kristin Reichel: Diderot's draft of a materialistic moral philosophy (1745–1754). Methodical instruments and poetological communication. Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2012, ISBN 978-3-8260-4940-8 , p. 348
  25. ↑ Denis Diderot: On the interpretation of nature. Verlag Philipp Reclam jun., Leipzig 1967, pp. 42, 41, 46 ff.
  26. ↑ Volker Gerhardt: Experimental Philosophy. About existential and pragmatic motives in current thinking. ( Memento of the original from May 12, 2014 in the Internet Archive ; PDF; 275 kB) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. German Society for Aesthetics, p. 13, online @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.dgae.de
  27. ^ Francois Pepin, Francine Markovits: Philosophy expérimentale et chimie chez Diderot. Université de Paris-Nanterre, 2007, ISBN 978-2-8124-0384-2
  28. ↑ Thilo Schabert: Diderot. In: Arno Baruzzi: Enlightenment and materialism in France in the 18th century. List Verlag, Munich 1968, pp. 99-131.
  29. ↑ On the interpretation of nature . Preface by Eckart Richter. Verlag Philipp Reclam jun., Leipzig 1967, p. 88
  30. ↑ Denis Diderot: De l'interprétation de la nature. (1754)
  31. ^ Paul Jansen: Philosophy. In: Peter-Eckhard Knabe (Ed.): France in the Age of Enlightenment. dme-Verlag, Cologne 1985, ISBN 3-922977-15-4 , pp. 70-75.
  32. ^ Jean Rostand: Diderot et la Biologie. In: Revue d'histoire des sciences et de leurs applications , Année (1952), Volume 5, Numéro 5-1, pp. 5-17
  33. ↑ Denis Diderot: On the interpretation of nature. Preface by Eckart Richter. Publishing house Philipp Reclam jun., Leipzig 1967
  34. ↑ Ursula Winter: The materialism in Diderot. Librairie Droz, Genève 1972, ISBN 2-600-03851-5 , p. 92
  35. ↑ Helmut Holzhey, Vilem Mudroch, Friedrich Ueberweg, Johannes Rohbeck: Outline of the history of philosophy: The philosophy of the 18th century. 2 half floors. Schwabe-Verlag, Basel 2008, ISBN 978-3-7965-2445-5 , p. 529.