2.1.1 Reasoned Analysis and Empirical Claims
Reasoned Analysis
Question at Issue:
How did alchemy help develop modern chemistry?
Evidence and Information:
- Compare and contrast principles of alchemy and chemistry
- Examples of alchemical experiments
- Types of equipment used in alchemy
- Identities of known alchemists
Assumptions:
- Alchemy is considered a pseudoscience, but it contributed to modern chemistry
- Alchemy’s associations with witchcraft and sorcery may have given alchemy an undeserved negative reputation.
Concepts:
- Chemistry
- Scientific method
- Alchemy
- Philosopher’s stone
- Pseudoscience
- Sorcery
- Witchcraft
- Transmutation
Context:
- Early Modern Europe
- Middle Ages
- Ancient Egypt
- Islamic science
- Enlightenment
Point of View:
- Chemists
- Alchemists
- Religious
- Scientific
Purpose:
- To evaluate the degree to which alchemy contributed to modern chemistry in order to see whether or not alchemy should still be considered a pseudoscience
Implications and Consequences:
- If alchemy should no longer be considered a pseudoscience, then it is possible that other practices now considered pseudoscientific might in the future be recognized as legitimate science; it could also change the way that the field of chemistry is viewed.
Conclusions and Interpretations:
The basic principles of alchemy can be shown to be linked to the foundation of chemistry
Disciplinary Lenses
Chemistry
Question at Issue:
How does a substance transform into something else?
Evidence and Information:
- How chemicals react to each other to form new substances
- Research on whether it is possible to transform one metal into another
- If claims to be able to transmute a base metal into gold are replicable
- Which types of substances can be transmuted into different substances
Assumptions:
- The basic principles of chemistry can be found in alchemy
- It is possible for one substance to change into another
Concepts:
- Chemistry
- Molecules
- Bonds
- Compounds
- Transmutation
Context:
- History of science
- Enlightenment
Point of View:
- Chemists
- Alchemists
- Historians of science
- Philosophers of science
Purpose:
- To evaluate a main alchemical principle using contemporary scientific criteria
Implications and Consequences:
- Alchemy would be reconsidered not as a pseudoscience but as a science
- Alternatively, alchemy and chemistry developed independently and should be understood as distinct practices
Conclusions and Interpretations:
The alchemical concept of transmutation of metals contributed to modern chemistry.
History
Question at issue:
How has alchemy been viewed in the past?
Evidence and Information:
- Primary source records like alchemical texts, commentaries on alchemy by contemporary writers or scientists
- Secondary sources like modern histories of alchemy and science
Assumptions:
- The perception of alchemy has evolved over time
Concepts:
- Magic
- Religion
- Philosopher’s stone
- Enlightenment, science
- Alchemy
Context:
- Medieval history
- Middle Ages
- History
- Alchemy
- Chemistry
Point of View:
- Historians
- Alchemists
- Philosophers of science
Purpose:
- To understand the progression of alchemy, how it developed and may have influenced chemistry, and why it was and is viewed differently from chemical sciences
Implications and Consequences:
- The history of alchemy paints alchemy in a negative light, causing it to be viewed as a pseudoscience
- Alternatively, alchemy has always been considered a pseudoscience
Conclusions and Interpretations:
The perception of alchemy is changing on the basis of new historical information.
Empirical Claims
Our claim: Alchemy helped to develop modern chemistry by serving as an avenue for chemical exploration, and therefore should not be considered a pseudoscience.
- Clarity: This claim is represented clearly through the examples provided and historical background provided.
- Accuracy: This is accurate as the argument is based on many peer-reviewed sources, and thus represents the current scholarly consensus (albeit subject to change with new information).
- Importance and relevance: Relevant to today in understanding the origins of chemistry.
- Sufficiency: This is sufficient as the claim is backed up with several examples to enhance the overall argument and understanding.
- Depth: The argument provides a relatively deep investigation into the long history of alchemy.
- Breadth: The argument looks into multiple aspects of alchemy, from religion to scientific views and alchemical practices.
- Precision: A large number of recently published scholarly, peer-reviewed sources repeatedly support this claim.
Opposing claim: Alchemy is a pseudoscience steeped in magic.
- Clarity: The claim is clear due to the modern connotation of alchemy in pop culture as dealing with magic.
- Accuracy: It is accurate with respect to the part of the alchemy that was devoted to finding immortality, but is inaccurate in regards to other aspects of alchemical research.
- Importance and relevance: It is relevant to the understanding of early modern history and scientific advancements of the Enlightenment.
- Sufficiency: Not sufficient as many aspects go unexplained or ignored, and the claim is not based on a contemporary understanding of all aspects of alchemy.
- Depth: Does not dive deep into the subject of alchemy and makes the claim based on popular reputation rather than scientific research and consensus.
- Breadth: Lacks some breadth as it ignores the scientific achievements of alchemists and the scientific processes they used.
- Precision: Generalizes the entire practice on the basis of a few poorly understood elements, so the claim is imprecise.