Vol. 8 No. 1 (2024)
Historical Articles

For a Dialogue Between the Teaching of Chemistry and the History and Philosophy of Chemistry: the Case of the Concept of ‘Chemical Element’

PDF
Editorial History
  • Ronei Clécio Mocellin,
  • Martín Labarca
Ronei Clécio Mocellin
Department of Philosophy, Federal University of Paraná, Brazil
Bio
Martín Labarca
Department of Philosophy, University of Buenos Aires – CONICET, Argentina
Bio
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/Substantia-2324

Published 2024-03-04

Keywords

  • chemical element,
  • Lavoisier,
  • Mendeleev,
  • Paneth,
  • history and philosophy of chemistry

How to Cite

Mocellin, R. C., & Labarca, M. (2024). For a Dialogue Between the Teaching of Chemistry and the History and Philosophy of Chemistry: the Case of the Concept of ‘Chemical Element’. Substantia, 8(1), 81–89. https://doi.org/10.36253/Substantia-2324

Copyright (c) 2023 Ronei Clécio Mocellin, Martín Labarca

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

The concept of ‘element’ is one of the most important concepts in the chemical sciences. It plays a key role to explain the chemical reactions and the basis of the periodic table. It is also central to the modern philosophy of chemistry because of its role in discussions about the nature of the periodic system and natural classes. In the field of chemistry teaching it is a paradigmatic case of alternative conceptions. In general, two definitions of ‘chemical element’ coexist. The first, due to Lavoisier, conceptualizes an ‘element’ in a macroscopic ontology and the second, usually considered the ‘modern’ definition, conceptualizes an element in an ontology of particle. Some authors state that it is time to consider the former conceptualization as merely ‘historical’ and focus teaching on the basis of the most recent definition. The present paper aims to address this problem from a pluralist perspective by highlighting the pedagogical relevance of incorporating historical-philosophical analyses in the explanation of scientific concepts.

PDF
Editorial History

References

  1. Scerri, E. R. (Ed.)., What is an element? A collection of essays by chemists, philosophers, historians, and educators, Oxford/New York, Oxford University Press, 2020.
  2. Salem, J., Les atomistes de l’Antiquité. Démocrite , Épicure, Lucrèce, Paris, Flammarion, 2013.
  3. Sambursky, S., The physical world of the Greeks, translated from the Hebrew by Merton Dagut, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1960.
  4. Zaterka, L., A filosofia experimental na Inglaterra do século XVII, São Paulo, Humanitas, 2004.
  5. Boyle, R., Sceptical chymist, London, Everyman, 1911 [1652], p. 186-187.
  6. Boas, M., Robert Boyle and seventeenth-century chemistry, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1958.
  7. Kuhn, T. S., “Robert Boyle and structural chemistry in the seventeenth century”. ISIS, 43(1), 1952, 12-36.
  8. Clericuzio, A., Elements, principles and corpuscles: A study of atomism and chemistry in the seventeenth century, Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002, p. 5.
  9. Lavoisier, A. L., The Elements of Chemistry. Translation of Robert Keer with a new introduction by Douglas McKie, New York, Dover Publications, 1965 (Edinburgh, 1790), preface, p. XXIV.
  10. Scerri, E. R., The periodic table – its story and its significance, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007.
  11. Siegfried, R., “Lavoisier and the phlogistic connection”, Ambix, 36, 1989, 31-41.
  12. Bensaude-Vincent, B., & Stengers, I. Histoire de la chimie , Paris, La Decouverte, 1993.
  13. Mendeleev, D. I., Principes de chimie . Traduit du russe par M. E. Achkinasi & M. H. Carrion, Paris, Bernard Tignol, 1895, v.1, p. 36.
  14. Mendeleev, D. I., op. cit., v.1, p. 462.
  15. Scerri, E. R., “Chemistry goes abstract”, Nature Chemistry, 1, 2009, 679–680.
  16. Mendeleev, D.I., quoted in Bensaude-Vincent, B., “Mendeleev: história de uma descoberta”. Tradução portuguesa de Rui Pacheco et. al. In M. Serres (Ed.), “História das Ciências”, vol. 3, Lisboa, Terramar, 1996, p. 91.
  17. Kragh, H., “Conceptual changes in chemistry: The notion of a chemical element, ca. 1900-1925”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 31, 2000, 435–450.
  18. Scerri, E. R., “What is an element? What is the periodic table? And what does quantum mechanics contribute to the question?” Foundations of Chemistry, 14, 2012, 69–81.
  19. Aston, F. W., Baxter, G. P., Brauner, B., Debierne, A., Leduc, A., Richards, T. W., Soddy, F., Urbain, G., “Report of the international committee on chemical elements”, Journal of American Chemical Society, 45(4), 1923, 867–874.
  20. Urbain, G., Les notions fondamentales d’élément et d’atome, Paris, Gauthier-Villars, 1925, p. 48-49. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k902847?rk=128756;0#
  21. Paneth, F. A., “The epistemological status of the chemical concept of element”, Foundations of Chemistry, 5, 2003, 129-130.
  22. McMurry, J. E. & Fay, R. Chemistry, Boston, Pearson Prentice Hall, 2012, p. 2.
  23. Zumdahl, S. & Zumdahl, S., Chemistry, Belmont C.A, Brooks Cole, 2010, p. 28.
  24. Chang, R., Chemistry, New York, McGraw-Hill, 2010, p. 11.
  25. Whitten, K. W.; Davis, R. E.; Peck, M. L & Stanley, G. G., Chemistry, Boston/Massachusetts, Cengage Learning, 2015, p. 15.
  26. Oxtoby, D. W.; Gillis, H. P.; & Campion, A., Principles of modern chemistry, Belmont C.A, Brooks Cole, 2012, p. 8.
  27. Masterton, W. L.; Hurley, C. N. & Neth, E. J., Chemistry: Principles and reactions. Belmont C.A, Brooks Cole, 2009, p. 686.
  28. Atkins, P. & Jones, L., Chemical principles: The quest for insight, 5th edition, New York, W. H. Freeman and Company, 2010, p. F16.
  29. Ghibaudi, E.; Regis, A. & Roletto, E., “What do chemists mean when they talk about elements?”, Journal of Chemical Education, 90, 2013, 1626–1631.
  30. Gkitzia, V.; Salta, K. & Tzougraki, C., “Students’ competence in translating between different types of chemical representations”, Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 21, 2020, 307–330.
  31. López-Valentín, D. M., “An empirical view of the teaching of the chemical element concept”. In Prestes, M. E. B. & Silva, C. C. (eds.), “Teaching science with context: historical, philosophical, and sociological approaches”, Springer, Dordrecht, 2018, 265–275.
  32. Stains, M. & Talanquer, V., “A2: Element or compound?”, Journal of Chemical Education, 84, 2007, 880−883.
  33. Myers, R. J., “What are elements and compounds?”, Journal of Chemical Education, 89, 2012, 832–833.
  34. Roundy, W. H., “What is an element?”, Journal of Chemical Education, 66, 1989, 729–730.
  35. Silberberg, M. S., Chemistry. The molecular nature of matter and change, McGraw-Hill, 2018, p. 44.
  36. Roundy, W. H., op. cit., p. 719.
  37. Jensen, W. B., “Logic, history, and the chemistry textbook: II. Can we unmuddle the chemistry textbook?”, Journal of Chemical Education, 75, 1998, 817–828.
  38. Johnstone, A. H., “Teaching of chemistry – Logical or psychological?”, Chemical Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 1, 2000, 9−15.
  39. Nelson, P., “Basic chemical concepts”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4, 2003, 19–24.
  40. Nelson, P., “Definition of ‘element’”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7, 2006, 288–289.
  41. IUPAC., “The IUPAC compendium of chemical terminology”. In McNaught, A., Wilkinson, A. (Eds.), Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1997, from http://goldbook.iupac.org
  42. Hendry, R., “Elements and (first) principles in chemistry”, Synthese, 198, 2021, 391–411.
  43. Luft, R., Dictionnaire des corps purs simples de la chimie (1997), quoted in Ghibaudi et al., op. cit., 1629.
  44. Accorinti, H. & Labarca, M. Commentary on the models of electronegativity, Journal of Chemical Education 97, 2020, 3474–3477.
  45. Chang, H., Is water H2O?: Evidence, realism and pluralism, Dordrecht, Springer, 2012, p. 20.
  46. Cetin, P. S., “Explicit argumentation instruction to facilitate conceptual understanding and argumentation skills”, Research in Science and Technological Education, 32, 2014, 1–20.
  47. Driver R., Newton P., & Osborne J., “Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms”, Science & Education, 84, 2000, 287–312.
  48. Von Aufschnaiter, C.; Erduran, S., Osborne J. & Simon S., “Arguing to learn and learning to argue: case studies of how students' argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 2008, 101–131.
  49. Labarca, M. & Srivaths, A. (2016). On the placement of hydrogen and helium in the periodic system: a new approach. Chemistry: Bulgarian Journal of Science Education 25, 2016, 514–530.
  50. Kragh, H., “On the ontology of superheavy elements”, Substantia. An International Journal of the History of Chemistry, 1, 2017, 7–17.