Filosofando a química

OCTOBER 5, 2009 VOLUME 87, NUMBER 40 PP. 41 - 42
Philosophizing Chemistry
Philosophers delve into the central science
Jyllian N. Kemsley

Philosophy as a discipline is an explicitly rational, logical, and critical way of examining fundamental questions of existence, knowledge, reason, and morality. The philosophy of science, in particular, reflects on the nature of science and how science works.

Philosophical questions go to the heart of how chemists communicate and conceptualize their subject and explore the limits of chemical knowledge—issues that are particularly important in teaching chemistry, said Jay Siegel, a chemistry professor at the University of Zurich. Siegel gave a talk on prebiotic chemistry at the International Society of Philosophy of Chemistry (ISPC) meeting, held in Philadelphia in August. Siegel noted that because no sentient being was around to observe the prebiotic world and there can be no fossil record, the philosophical questions about what kinds of things we ask, what we know, and how we know it are central to his research.

Although chemistry often brings up such philosophical questions, philosophers have tended to ignore the field in favor of physics and biology. Philosophers typically viewed chemistry as something that could simply be reduced to physics, said Eric R. Scerri, a philosopher and chemistry lecturer at the University of California, Los Angeles. Also, “chemists are seen as more concerned with making molecules and not sitting back and philosophizing,” Scerri said.

In the past two decades, however, philosophers have increasingly turned their attention to chemistry, according to Michael Weisberg, a philosophy professor at the University of Pennsylvania and the organizer of the ISPC meeting. At the meeting, he and other philosophers of chemistry described how they are trying to better understand the underpinnings of the language and structure of chemistry, as well as the purposes and limits of models and other tools that chemists use.

Scerri, for example, described one area of philosophical consideration as defining the concept of an element at its most fundamental level: Is sodium, for example, that piece of gray metal stored in a lab, or is it something more abstract? It is more proper, perhaps, to think of elemental sodium as that thing that gives properties not just to the metal but also to NaCl and other compounds. Sodium may be best described as that abstract thing that you point to on the periodic table, defined only by its atomic number, Scerri said.

In a similar vein, Joseph E. Earley Sr., a professor of chemistry at Georgetown University, spoke about what it means to consider the properties of a molecule. Properties of composites are often considered to come from the properties of their components, he said, “therefore the components have been considered to be property bearers.”

But it’s problematic to think of molecules and their components that way, Earley noted. If one looks at the dye ruthenium red, for example, one sees a deep red substance that absorbs light at 532 nm. None of ruthenium red’s component parts has that characteristic. Or, considering the structure of a proton, the masses of its three component quarks add up to only 5% of the mass of the proton. The conclusion, Earley said, is that the properties come not just from the components but how they’re connected—just as a ham sandwich is not merely ham and bread but ham between two slices of bread.
...

Read more here/Leia mais aqui.