Accept the findings concerning the discipline dynamics of alchemy and its core questions in the Western European chymistry community.
Friesen and Patton apply Patton and Al-Zayadi’s scientonomic framework for understanding disciplines to a case study of the development of the chemical discipline ("chymistry") from the 17th century through the early 18th century in Western Europe. Using evidence from the tradition of textbook publication that emerged in the seventeenth-century chymistry, they reconstruct the top-level of the question hierarchy of chymistry. Analyzing how these questions and their associated theories were received, they first show how, starting in the 1660s, alchemy transitioned from a synonym of chymistry to chymistry’s subdiscipline with a more limited scope. They identify that the rejection of alchemy's core questions occurred in the 1720s based on the reception of these questions in scientific publications and by academic institutions. They conclude that the subdiscipline of alchemy became rejected in the 1720s. While they closely follow Newman and Principe's research on early modern alchemy and chymistry in their reconstruction of the episode, the use of the scientonomic framework reveals important differences concerning the dynamics of the process.
Accept the findings concerning the discipline dynamics of alchemy and its core questions in the Western European chymistry community:
|Alchemy and chymistry are synonyms.
|Alchemy is a subdiscipline of chymistry.
|Alchemy is a separate discipline.
|How can the philosopher’s stone be produced?
|How can metals be transmuted to one another?
|How can a cure-all medicine be made?
The modification is currently being evaluated; a verdict is pending.
Click on the Discussion tab for comments.
- Friesen, Izzy and Patton, Paul. (2023) Discipline Dynamics of Chymistry and Rejection of Alchemy. Scientonomy 5, 93-110. Retrieved from https://scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/42268.