New entry on Mach in Stanford Encyclopedia

Ernst Mach is one of the more interesting of the nineteenth century polymaths. A physicist, he also kicked off positivism, and (I did not previously know) was an evolutionary epistemologist:

Mach is part of the empiricist tradition, but he also believed in an a priori. But it is a biologized a priori: what is a priori to an individual organism was a posteriori to its ancestors; not only does the a priori pre-form experience, but the a priori is itself formed from experience. It was simultaneously the contradiction and confirmation of Kantian epistemology. In as much as Kant used the a priori to explain how knowledge is possible, Mach uses the knowledge of the new sciences to explain how an a priori is possible. One more patch of philosophy, it was thought, yielded to science.

I had thought the originator of that view was Konrad Lorenz, in his Russian manuscript. Anyway, a new article by Paul Pojman. It looks very comprehensive, as articles in the increasingly diverse online Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy usually are.

Pojman, Paul, "Ernst Mach", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), forthcoming URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2008/entries/ernst-mach/>.

More like this

Ernst Rutherford, the "father" of nuclear physics, once airily declared "In science there is only physics. All the rest is stamp collecting". By this he meant that the theory of physics is the only significant thing in science. Such mundane activities as taxonomy in biology were just sampling…
Marc Ereshfsky's entry on "Species" in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has been updated, though not to remove the classic "Essentialism Story" that has been called into question by a number of scholars lately. Under the fold, I will quote Marc's comments and critique them. [I can do this…
Many science bloggers are dedicating this week to a week of pure science, in which they are posting a single non-controversial science piece each day. Since I barely manage to get out a quality post every other day, and also since I'm writing a paper on a controversial subject (global warming), I…
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is an online, but highly regarded, source of review articles on philosophical topics, edited by Ed Zalta. Three new articles have popped up lately that have attracted my attention: The first is on Metaphysics, by Peter van Inwagen. Metaphysics is a hard…

Nice coincidence:

> Mach uses the knowledge of the new sciences to explain how
> an a priori is possible

You posted that just 10 minutes after I'd written some lecture notes on the topic. I didn't know it was due to Mach ... fortunately, what I wrote was general enough that my ignorance didn't matter. (I attributed it to the logical positivists in general, and I DID say that a lot of their views were due to Mach.)

Thanks for the interesting link. I too didn't know that Mach was an early evolutionary epistemologist. I found a nice paper by the Hungarian philosopher Caba Pléh in which he nicely traces genealogy of some ideas of evolutionary epistemology from Ernst Mach to Dan Dennett.

It appears that Ernst Mach's train of thought influenced the German psychologist Karl Bühler (who's mostly famous for his Organon-Model of Language). Bühler in turn was a teacher to both Konrad Lorenz and Karl Popper, who were inspired by his ideas in different ways. Popper, and in a weaker, indirect sense, Lorenz then influenced Dan Dennetts evolutionary reasoning about stances and Popperian creatures.

http://www.cogsci.bme.hu/csaba/English/Publications/History%20and%20the…

http://www.cogsci.bme.hu/csaba/English/index_angol.htm

The site seems to be down at the moment, though