Hoffmann Christoph, Métraux Alexandre
University of Lucerne,SwitzerlandE-mail:
Archives Henri Poincaré,Université de Lorraine (campus Nancy),FranceE-mail:
Sci Context. 2016 Dec;29(4):429-433. doi: 10.1017/S0269889716000181.
With the death of Ernst Mach on February 19, 1916, one day after his seventy-eighth birthday, a question finally became explicit that had been looming for some time. It was as simple as it was fundamental: who, in the end, was this man, a scientist or a philosopher? The importance of this question for contemporaries can easily be gleaned from the obituaries that appeared in the weeks following Mach's death: one in the Physikalische Zeitschrift, written by Albert Einstein, and another in the Archiv für die Geschichte der Philosophie, written by Mach's former student Heinrich Gomperz. They both addressed this critical issue in plain words. Einstein stressed that Mach "was not a philosopher who chose the natural sciences as the object of his speculation, but a many-sided, interested, diligent scientist who also took visible pleasure in detailed questions outside the burning issues of general interest" (Einstein 1916, 104; translation cited in Blackmore 1992, 158). Gomperz in turn first emphasized the great loss science had experienced with Mach's death, asking subsequently whether "the suffering science is physics or philosophy?" (Gomperz 1916, 321). His answer broadly followed Einstein's conclusion; relying on Mach's own words, he reminded his readers that Mach never claimed to be a philosopher, but merely was looking for a viewpoint that transcended the disciplinary constraints of particular scientific activities.
1916年2月19日,恩斯特·马赫在其七十八岁生日后的第二天与世长辞,一个此前已隐隐浮现多时的问题终于明晰起来。这个问题既简单又根本:说到底,这个人是科学家还是哲学家?从马赫去世后的几周内出现的讣告中,能轻易看出这个问题对当时人的重要性:一篇发表在《物理学期刊》上,由阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦撰写;另一篇发表在《哲学史档案》上,由马赫的 former student 海因里希·贡佩尔茨撰写。他们都直言不讳地探讨了这个关键问题。爱因斯坦强调,马赫“并非一位选择自然科学作为其思考对象的哲学家,而是一位多面、感兴趣且勤奋的科学家,他也从普遍关注的热点问题之外的细节问题中获得了明显的乐趣”(爱因斯坦,1916年,第104页;译文引自布莱克莫尔,1992年,第158页)。贡佩尔茨则首先强调了马赫的去世给科学带来的巨大损失,随后问道:“遭受损失的科学究竟是物理学还是哲学?”(贡佩尔茨,1916年,第321页)。他的答案大致遵循了爱因斯坦的结论;他引用马赫自己的话,提醒读者马赫从未自称是哲学家,而只是在寻找一个超越特定科学活动学科限制的观点。