| Attributs | Valeurs |
|---|
| type
| |
| Is Part Of
| |
| Subject
| |
| Title
| - How do Structural Formulas Embody the Theory of Organic Chemistry?
|
| has manifestation of work
| |
| related by
| |
| Author
| |
| Abstract
| - Organic chemistry provides fertile ground for scholars interested in understanding the role of non-linguistic representations in scientific thinking. In this discipline, it is not plausible to regard diagrams as simply heuristic aids for expressing or applying what is essentially a linguistic theory. Instead, it is more plausible to think of linguistic representation as supplementing theories whose principal expression is diagrammatic. Among the many sorts of diagrams employed by organic chemists, structural formulas are the most important. In this paper, by examining two central episodes in the development of structural formulas—Kekulé’s proposal of a structure for benzene and Ingold’s explanation of dipole moments in terms of ‘mesomerism’—I investigate how the norms for the production and interpretation of structural formulas evolve in response to experimental results and theoretical developments. I conclude that one principal way in which structural formulas embody the theory of organic chemistry is through these evolving norms. Example 1: Kekulé’s Structure for Benzene Example 2: Ingold and the Theory of Mesomerism or Resonance Philosophical Implications of these Examples
|
| article type
| |
| publisher identifier
| |
| Alternative Title
| - William Goodwin
- Structural Formulas and the Theory of Organic Chemistry
|
| is part of this journal
| |
