preview

Lavoisier

Decent Essays

“The art of reasoning is nothing more than a language well arranged” The end of Lavoisier’s opening quote by the Abbé de Condillac demonstrates the fundamental assumption of Lavoisier in creating his Elements of Chemistry. He is trying to create a nomenclature system for chemistry that will provide a framework for future chemists and keep chemistry firmly tied to nature, unlike previous chemists and natural philosophers who have assumed rather than discovered how nature functions. In creating this nomenclature, Lavoisier does various experiments and tries to keep assumptions out, basing every word on a fact that can be shown which, while possibly being the best way for a nomenclature system to be made, has a possible downfall of lack of flexibility …show more content…

He wants a chemist to be able to pick up all the essential properties of an object simply by knowing its name. Furthermore, since the name should give the essential properties of an object, it also provides a context within chemistry for the object it names. Knowing that one object is an acid and another an alkali, we might expect from this that they would combine with one another. This is Lavoisier’s goal. It is also a dramatic break from the past, where names showcased more physical properties of chemical objects. This is evident in names such as oil of vitriol and butter of antimony. These are so called because they look like oil and butter respectively. But why were these names problematic for Lavoisier? It is because of their physicality. Calling sulfuric acid oil of vitriol and then categorizing things as oils and butters is focusing on the matter of chemical objects rather than their form. The term “oil of vitriol” only allows me to know one characteristic of sulfuric acid, which while pragmatically helping me identify the object I need, …show more content…

He is trying to build a nomenclature system that departs from the past and focuses on deep chemical properties rather than physical properties. This creates a wider framework for each chemist who knows the nomenclature, as each name also gives the place that chemical object fits within the wider field. Lavoisier does this by emphasizing experimentation over theory, which allows him to characterize, but limits the subjects he can study within this work. Furthermore, the connectivity that is the hallmark of his system, and the reason it works so well, can also be problematic. The connections may connect too securely or not be cast wide enough, a fact we must recognize even as we recognize the ubiquitous nature of the problem. In the end, knowing the properties and reasons of Lavoisier’s system shows why it should be a hallmark for systems that try to find truth in simple

Get Access