Jump to content

Joseph Petzoldt: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Cite templates
Line 30: Line 30:
As Hentschel<ref name=hent>{{Cite book | author=Hentschel, K. | year=1990 | title=Interpretationen und Fehlinterpretationen der speziellen und der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie durch Zeitgenossen Albert Einsteins | location=Basel—Boston—Bonn | publisher=Birkhäuser | doi=10.18419/opus-7182 | isbn=978-3-7643-2438-4 | url=http://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/opus/volltexte/2010/5175/ }}; See sections 3.4.2 and 4.8.3.</ref> and in more detail Russo Krauss<ref name=krauss /><ref name=krauss2 /> have shown, Petzoldt was an early supporter and interpreter of the [[theory of relativity]]: In 1912<ref group=P>''[[s:de:Die Relativitätstheorie im erkenntnistheoretischen Zusammenhange des relativistischen Positivismus|Die Relativitätstheorie im erkenntnistheoretischen Zusammenhange des relativistischen Positivismus]]'', 1912. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft, Vol. 14, pp. 1055–1064.</ref> and 1914<ref name=pe14 group=P>''[[s:de:Die Relativitätstheorie der Physik|Die Relativitätstheorie der Physik]]'', 1914. Zeitschrift für positivistische Philosophie, Vol. 2, pp. 1–56</ref> he described the theory as a consistent implementation of the Machian philosophy and relativistic positivism, emphasizing the equivalence of all observer viewpoints and the relativity of lengths and times. Petzoldt's paper of 1914 was received very favorably by Einstein, who publicly recommended it in a newspaper article<ref>{{Citation|author=Einstein, A.|date=26 April 1914|title=Vom Relativitäts-Prinzip (CPAE Vol. 6)|journal=Vossische Zeitung|volume=209|pages=33–34|url=https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol6-doc/31}}; See also: [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol6-trans/15 English translation in "CPAE Vol. 6"]</ref> and also privately shared his broad consent by letter (even though Einstein had to correct Petzoldt's erroneous description of the [[twin paradox]]).<ref>Letter Einstein's to Petzoldt from 14. April 1914 in "The collected papers of Albert Einstein", Vol. 8a: [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol8a-doc/88 Document 5 in German] with [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol8-trans/40 English translation]</ref> Petzoldt handed over one of his books<ref group=P name=welt /> to Einstein at a personal meeting, after which Einstein wrote in a letter to Petzoldt that from reading the book he noticed "with delight" that he had "long shared your convictions".<ref>Letter Einstein's to Petzoldt from 11. June 1914 in: The collected papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 8a: [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol8a-doc/103 Document 13 in German] with [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol8-trans/52 English translation]</ref> According to Howard, Petzoldt's philosophical "law of univocalness" may have also been influential on Einstein's "point-coincidence argument" that resolves the [[hole argument]].<ref>{{cite book|author=Howard, D.| year=1992|contribution= Einstein and Eindeutigkeit: A Neglected Theme in the Philosophical Background to General Relativity|title=Studies in the History of General Relativity|editor=Eisenstaedt J, and Kox, A.J.|series=Einstein studies|volume=3|pages=154–243|location=Boston|publisher=Birkhäuser|isbn=0817634797}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Howard, D., & Norton, J. D.| year=1993|contribution=Out of the labyrinth? Einstein, Hertz, and the Göttingen answer to the hole argument|title=The attraction of gravitation: new studies in the history of general relativity|editor=J. Earman, M. Janssen and J. Norton|pages=30–62|location=Boston|series=Einstein studies|volume=5|publisher=Birkhäuser| bibcode=1993agns.book.....E|contribution-url=https://sites.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/labyrinth-HGR3.pdf}}</ref> In a letter from 1919, Petzoldt thanked Einstein for recommending him to a professorship in philosophy,<ref>Letter Petzoldt's to Einstein from 26 July 1919 in "The collected papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 9": [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-doc/189 Document 77 in German] with [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-trans/87 English translation]</ref> even though that initiative proved to be unsuccessful. Petzoldt continued to defend his interpretation in the 1920s, believing that Einstein's new [[general theory of relativity]] was consistent with Machian philosophy, particularly in regard to the role that [[Mach's principle]] and all "coincidences of impressions" play in that theory.<ref group=P>''[https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:101:1-201705143831 Die Stellung der Relativitätstheorie in der geistigen Entwicklung der Menschheit]'', Leipzig, Barth, 1921; 2. enlarged edition 1923.</ref><ref group=P name=pema>[{{Google books|id=nQFLAQAAMAAJ|page=490|plainurl=yes}} ''Das Verhältnis der Machschen Gedankenwelt zur Relativitätstheorie''], 1921. Appendix to the 8. edition of Ernst Mach's ''Die Mechanik in ihrer Entwickelung historisch-kritisch dargestellt'', pp. 490ff</ref><ref group=P>''Mechanistische Naturauffassung und Relativitätstheorie'', 1921. Annalen der Philosophie, 2, pp. [https://archive.org/details/annalenderphilos02vaihuoft/page/446/ 447–462].</ref>
As Hentschel<ref name=hent>{{Cite book | author=Hentschel, K. | year=1990 | title=Interpretationen und Fehlinterpretationen der speziellen und der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie durch Zeitgenossen Albert Einsteins | location=Basel—Boston—Bonn | publisher=Birkhäuser | doi=10.18419/opus-7182 | isbn=978-3-7643-2438-4 | url=http://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/opus/volltexte/2010/5175/ }}; See sections 3.4.2 and 4.8.3.</ref> and in more detail Russo Krauss<ref name=krauss /><ref name=krauss2 /> have shown, Petzoldt was an early supporter and interpreter of the [[theory of relativity]]: In 1912<ref group=P>''[[s:de:Die Relativitätstheorie im erkenntnistheoretischen Zusammenhange des relativistischen Positivismus|Die Relativitätstheorie im erkenntnistheoretischen Zusammenhange des relativistischen Positivismus]]'', 1912. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft, Vol. 14, pp. 1055–1064.</ref> and 1914<ref name=pe14 group=P>''[[s:de:Die Relativitätstheorie der Physik|Die Relativitätstheorie der Physik]]'', 1914. Zeitschrift für positivistische Philosophie, Vol. 2, pp. 1–56</ref> he described the theory as a consistent implementation of the Machian philosophy and relativistic positivism, emphasizing the equivalence of all observer viewpoints and the relativity of lengths and times. Petzoldt's paper of 1914 was received very favorably by Einstein, who publicly recommended it in a newspaper article<ref>{{Citation|author=Einstein, A.|date=26 April 1914|title=Vom Relativitäts-Prinzip (CPAE Vol. 6)|journal=Vossische Zeitung|volume=209|pages=33–34|url=https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol6-doc/31}}; See also: [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol6-trans/15 English translation in "CPAE Vol. 6"]</ref> and also privately shared his broad consent by letter (even though Einstein had to correct Petzoldt's erroneous description of the [[twin paradox]]).<ref>Letter Einstein's to Petzoldt from 14. April 1914 in "The collected papers of Albert Einstein", Vol. 8a: [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol8a-doc/88 Document 5 in German] with [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol8-trans/40 English translation]</ref> Petzoldt handed over one of his books<ref group=P name=welt /> to Einstein at a personal meeting, after which Einstein wrote in a letter to Petzoldt that from reading the book he noticed "with delight" that he had "long shared your convictions".<ref>Letter Einstein's to Petzoldt from 11. June 1914 in: The collected papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 8a: [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol8a-doc/103 Document 13 in German] with [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol8-trans/52 English translation]</ref> According to Howard, Petzoldt's philosophical "law of univocalness" may have also been influential on Einstein's "point-coincidence argument" that resolves the [[hole argument]].<ref>{{cite book|author=Howard, D.| year=1992|contribution= Einstein and Eindeutigkeit: A Neglected Theme in the Philosophical Background to General Relativity|title=Studies in the History of General Relativity|editor=Eisenstaedt J, and Kox, A.J.|series=Einstein studies|volume=3|pages=154–243|location=Boston|publisher=Birkhäuser|isbn=0817634797}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Howard, D., & Norton, J. D.| year=1993|contribution=Out of the labyrinth? Einstein, Hertz, and the Göttingen answer to the hole argument|title=The attraction of gravitation: new studies in the history of general relativity|editor=J. Earman, M. Janssen and J. Norton|pages=30–62|location=Boston|series=Einstein studies|volume=5|publisher=Birkhäuser| bibcode=1993agns.book.....E|contribution-url=https://sites.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/labyrinth-HGR3.pdf}}</ref> In a letter from 1919, Petzoldt thanked Einstein for recommending him to a professorship in philosophy,<ref>Letter Petzoldt's to Einstein from 26 July 1919 in "The collected papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 9": [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-doc/189 Document 77 in German] with [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-trans/87 English translation]</ref> even though that initiative proved to be unsuccessful. Petzoldt continued to defend his interpretation in the 1920s, believing that Einstein's new [[general theory of relativity]] was consistent with Machian philosophy, particularly in regard to the role that [[Mach's principle]] and all "coincidences of impressions" play in that theory.<ref group=P>''[https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:101:1-201705143831 Die Stellung der Relativitätstheorie in der geistigen Entwicklung der Menschheit]'', Leipzig, Barth, 1921; 2. enlarged edition 1923.</ref><ref group=P name=pema>[{{Google books|id=nQFLAQAAMAAJ|page=490|plainurl=yes}} ''Das Verhältnis der Machschen Gedankenwelt zur Relativitätstheorie''], 1921. Appendix to the 8. edition of Ernst Mach's ''Die Mechanik in ihrer Entwickelung historisch-kritisch dargestellt'', pp. 490ff</ref><ref group=P>''Mechanistische Naturauffassung und Relativitätstheorie'', 1921. Annalen der Philosophie, 2, pp. [https://archive.org/details/annalenderphilos02vaihuoft/page/446/ 447–462].</ref>


However, Petzoldt's radical relativistic-positivistic interpretation of relativity theory, along with insufficient technical understanding, led him to commit fundamental errors: In 1918–1919 he criticized representations of relativity theory that he believed to be reliant on "absolute" views and concepts,<ref group=P>''Verbietet die Relativitätstheorie Raum und Zeit als etwas wirkliches zu denken?'', 1918. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft, Vol. 20, pp. [https://archive.org/details/verhandlungen-der-deutschen-physikalischen-gesellschaft-vol-20/page/188/ 189–201].</ref><ref group=P>''Die Unmöglichkeit mechanischer Modelle zur Veranschaulichung der Relativitätstheorie'', 1919. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft, Vol. 21, pp. [https://archive.org/details/verhandlungen-der-deutschen-physikalischen-gesellschaft-vol-21/page/494/ 495–503].</ref> causing Einstein to write that he was "disappointed" in Petzoldt whose earlier writings on relativity have been better.<ref>Letter Einstein's to Scheel on 17. March 1919 in: The collected papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 9: [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-doc/88 Document 9 in German].</ref> Petzoldt also misunderstood the [[Ehrenfest paradox]], which even an exchange of letters with Einstein in 1919 failed to clarify.<ref>Letter exchange between Einsteins and Petzoldt (1919) in: The collected papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 9: [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-doc/189 Document 77 in German] with [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-trans/87 English translation], [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-doc/209 Document 93 in German] with [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-trans/96 English translation], [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-doc/214 Document 95 in German] with [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-trans/99 English translation].</ref> Petzoldt also continued to be unconvinced about the twin paradox (which he had already criticized in 1914<ref name=pe14 group=P /> as "a return to absolutist thinking") as shown in a correspondence with [[Hans Reichenbach]] in 1922.<ref>Hentschel, K. (ed.): ''Die Korrespondenz Petzoldt-Reichenbach: Zur Entwicklung der wissenschaftlichen Philosophie in Berlin'', Berlin: Sigma, 1990 (= Berliner Beiträge zur Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften und der Technik, book 12).</ref> Petzoldt's philosophy, along with his interpretation of the theory of relativity, was increasingly criticized and rejected by other philosophers such as Reichenbach, [[Moritz Schlick]] and [[Ernst Cassirer]] in the early 1920s, at which time also Einstein moved away from Machian philosophy towards a philosophical realism and apparently ceased his relations to Petzoldt after 1920.<ref name=hent /><ref name=krauss /><ref name=krauss2 />
However, Petzoldt's radical relativistic-positivistic interpretation of relativity theory, along with insufficient technical understanding, led him to commit fundamental errors: In 1918–1919 he criticized representations of relativity theory that he believed to be reliant on "absolute" views and concepts,<ref group=P>''Verbietet die Relativitätstheorie Raum und Zeit als etwas wirkliches zu denken?'', 1918. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft, Vol. 20, pp. [https://archive.org/details/verhandlungen-der-deutschen-physikalischen-gesellschaft-vol-20/page/188/ 189–201].</ref><ref group=P>''Die Unmöglichkeit mechanischer Modelle zur Veranschaulichung der Relativitätstheorie'', 1919. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft, Vol. 21, pp. [https://archive.org/details/verhandlungen-der-deutschen-physikalischen-gesellschaft-vol-21/page/494/ 495–503].</ref> causing Einstein to write that he was "disappointed" in Petzoldt whose earlier writings on relativity have been better.<ref>Letter Einstein's to Scheel on 17. March 1919 in: The collected papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 9: [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-doc/88 Document 9 in German].</ref> Petzoldt also misunderstood the [[Ehrenfest paradox]], which even an exchange of letters with Einstein in 1919 failed to clarify.<ref>Letter exchange between Einsteins and Petzoldt (1919) in: The collected papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 9: [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-doc/189 Document 77 in German] with [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-trans/87 English translation], [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-doc/209 Document 93 in German] with [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-trans/96 English translation], [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-doc/214 Document 95 in German] with [https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol9-trans/99 English translation].</ref> Petzoldt also continued to be unconvinced about the twin paradox (which he had already criticized in 1914<ref name=pe14 group=P /> as "a return to absolutist thinking") as shown in a correspondence with [[Hans Reichenbach]] in 1922.<ref>{{Cite book|editor=Hentschel, K.|title=Die Korrespondenz Petzoldt-Reichenbach: Zur Entwicklung der wissenschaftlichen Philosophie in Berlin|location=Berlin|publisher=Sigma|year=1990|series=Berliner Beiträge zur Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften und der Technik|volume=12|isbn=9783928068031}}.</ref> Petzoldt's philosophy, along with his interpretation of the theory of relativity, was increasingly criticized and rejected by other philosophers such as Reichenbach, [[Moritz Schlick]] and [[Ernst Cassirer]] in the early 1920s, at which time also Einstein moved away from Machian philosophy towards a philosophical realism and apparently ceased his relations to Petzoldt after 1920.<ref name=hent /><ref name=krauss /><ref name=krauss2 />


The philosophical relationship between Petzoldt, Mach and Einstein also played a role in the controversy over a posthumously published preface to Mach's book "Optics", allegedly written by Ernst Mach in July 1913, in which he rejected the theory of relativity. Wolters<ref name=wolt>{{Cite book|author=Wolters, G.|title=Mach I, Mach II, Einstein und die Relativitätstheorie. Eine Fälschung und ihre Folgen|publisher=de Gruyter|location= Berlin|year=1987|doi=10.1515/9783110846966|isbn=9783110846966}}; see letter Mach's to Petzoldt on pp. 187f.; and rivalry between Ludwig Mach and Petzoldt on pp. 365ff.</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Wolters, G.|contribution=Mach and Einstein, or, clearing troubled waters in the history of science|title=Einstein and the Changing Worldviews of Physics|date=2011|editor=Lehner, C.; Renn, J.; Schemmel, M.|doi=10.1007/978-0-8176-4940-1_3|pages=39–57|publisher=Birkhäuser|location=Boston|isbn=978-0-8176-4939-5 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Wolters, G.|contribution=Mach and Relativity: A Neverending Story in HOPOSia?|title=Ernst Mach – Life, Work, Influence|date=2019|editor=Stadler, F.|series=Vienna Circle Yearbook|volume=22|doi=10.1007/978-3-030-04378-0_28|pages=367–385|publisher=Springer|location=Cham}}</ref> argues that this preface was actually not written by Ernst Mach, but a forgery by his anti-relativist son [[Ludwig Mach]], because various sources and letters apparently show that Ernst Mach around 1913–1914 did not reject the theory of relativity, but had a very positive opinion of it. For example, there is a letter from Ernst Mach to Petzoldt dated 1 May 1914, which begins: "The accompanied letter from Einstein proves the penetration of positivist philosophy into physics; you can rejoice about it ... A year ago, philosophy as such was a mere stupidity...". From that Wolters concludes that in Mach's opinion, positivist philosophy entered modern physics through relativity theory, because relativity is perhaps the most advanced physical theory that sets the standards for philosophy, therefore positivist philosophy is no longer stupid unlike other philosophies. Thus, there is an emphatic statement of Mach in favor of relativity, written ''after'' the alleged foreword of July 1913. Wolters also alludes to the rivalry between Petzoldt and Ludwig Mach:<ref name=wolt /> In 1921, Petzoldt published an appendix to the 8th edition of Ernst Mach's book "Mechanics", in which Petzoldt described relativity as a consequence of Ernst Mach's philosophy, while Ludwig soon afterwards published the aforementioned (forged, according to Wolters) anti-relativistic foreword in "Optics". After Petzoldt's death, Ludwig published the 9th edition of "Mechanics" in 1933, in which Petzoldt's pro-relativistic appendix was removed and a new preface appeared, in which Ludwig once again inserted (forged, according to Wolters) anti-relativistic statements of Ernst Mach.
The philosophical relationship between Petzoldt, Mach and Einstein also played a role in the controversy over a posthumously published preface to Mach's book "Optics", allegedly written by Ernst Mach in July 1913, in which he rejected the theory of relativity. Wolters<ref name=wolt>{{Cite book|author=Wolters, G.|title=Mach I, Mach II, Einstein und die Relativitätstheorie. Eine Fälschung und ihre Folgen|publisher=de Gruyter|location= Berlin|year=1987|doi=10.1515/9783110846966|isbn=9783110846966}}; see letter Mach's to Petzoldt on pp. 187f.; and rivalry between Ludwig Mach and Petzoldt on pp. 365ff.</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Wolters, G.|contribution=Mach and Einstein, or, clearing troubled waters in the history of science|title=Einstein and the Changing Worldviews of Physics|date=2011|editor=Lehner, C.; Renn, J.; Schemmel, M.|doi=10.1007/978-0-8176-4940-1_3|pages=39–57|publisher=Birkhäuser|location=Boston|isbn=978-0-8176-4939-5 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Wolters, G.|contribution=Mach and Relativity: A Neverending Story in HOPOSia?|title=Ernst Mach – Life, Work, Influence|date=2019|editor=Stadler, F.|series=Vienna Circle Yearbook|volume=22|doi=10.1007/978-3-030-04378-0_28|pages=367–385|publisher=Springer|location=Cham}}</ref> argues that this preface was actually not written by Ernst Mach, but a forgery by his anti-relativist son [[Ludwig Mach]], because various sources and letters apparently show that Ernst Mach around 1913–1914 did not reject the theory of relativity, but had a very positive opinion of it. For example, there is a letter from Ernst Mach to Petzoldt dated 1 May 1914, which begins: "The accompanied letter from Einstein proves the penetration of positivist philosophy into physics; you can rejoice about it ... A year ago, philosophy as such was a mere stupidity...". From that Wolters concludes that in Mach's opinion, positivist philosophy entered modern physics through relativity theory, because relativity is perhaps the most advanced physical theory that sets the standards for philosophy, therefore positivist philosophy is no longer stupid unlike other philosophies. Thus, there is an emphatic statement of Mach in favor of relativity, written ''after'' the alleged foreword of July 1913. Wolters also alludes to the rivalry between Petzoldt and Ludwig Mach:<ref name=wolt /> In 1921, Petzoldt published an appendix to the 8th edition of Ernst Mach's book "Mechanics", in which Petzoldt described relativity as a consequence of Ernst Mach's philosophy, while Ludwig soon afterwards published the aforementioned (forged, according to Wolters) anti-relativistic foreword in "Optics". After Petzoldt's death, Ludwig published the 9th edition of "Mechanics" in 1933, in which Petzoldt's pro-relativistic appendix was removed and a new preface appeared, in which Ludwig once again inserted (forged, according to Wolters) anti-relativistic statements of Ernst Mach.

Revision as of 10:38, 22 July 2024

Joseph Petzoldt
Born(1862-11-04)4 November 1862
Altenburg, Saxe-Altenburg, German Confederation
Died1 August 1929(1929-08-01) (aged 66)
Berlin, Prussia, German Republic
Alma materUniversity of Göttingen
Era20th-century philosophy
RegionWestern philosophy
SchoolEmpirio-criticism
InstitutionsTH Charlottenburg
Main interests
Empirical knowledge, philosophy of science
Notable ideas
Relativistic positivism

Joseph Petzoldt (4 November 1862 – 1 August 1929) was a German positivist philosopher and teacher. He is known as the founder of several societies aimed at advancing positivist philosophy in the scientific world, and was an early proponent of the theory of relativity which he interpreted on the basis of his philosophy of "relativistic positivism".

Life

He studied natural sciences in the 1880s. In 1890 he obtained his doctorate in Göttingen on the economy principle with the paper Maxima, Minima und Ökonomie. In 1891 he became senior teacher in at the Gymnasium in Spandau. In 1904 he obtained the habilitation in philosophy with the second volume of his work Einführung in die Philosophie der Reinen Erfahrung, and taught as a Privatdozent at the TH Charlottenburg (today TU Berlin). In 1922 he became professor extraordinarius of philosophy at the TH Charlottenburg.[1][2][3] Ludwig Wittgenstein possibly attended lectures on mechanics by Petzoldt in Berlin between 1906 and 1908.[4]

Philosophy and relativity

Petzoldt's philosophy,[5][6] developed in the late 19th and early 20th century,[P 1][P 2][P 3][P 4][P 5] and called "relativistic positivism" by him since 1912,[P 6] was based on the positivistic-sensualistic philosophy of Empirio-criticism by Ernst Mach and Richard Avenarius. He emphasized the relative nature of all phenomena from the perspective of observers in line with Protagoras and the rejection of the concept of substance in line with George Berkeley, thereby eliminating the difference between "appearance" and "reality", and defined the "law of univocalness"[P 2] according to which all observers must achieve a univocally determined description of processes. Vladimir Lenin in his work Materialism and Empirio-criticism (1909) criticized the views of Petzoldt and other followers of Mach as solipsism. Petzoldt was founder and first chairman of the "society for positivist philosophy" (1912–1921) which was supported[7] by Albert Einstein, David Hilbert, Sigmund Freud, and Felix Klein, among others; and he was co-founder of the "local Berlin group" of the "international society for empirical philosophy" (1927).

As Hentschel[8] and in more detail Russo Krauss[5][6] have shown, Petzoldt was an early supporter and interpreter of the theory of relativity: In 1912[P 7] and 1914[P 8] he described the theory as a consistent implementation of the Machian philosophy and relativistic positivism, emphasizing the equivalence of all observer viewpoints and the relativity of lengths and times. Petzoldt's paper of 1914 was received very favorably by Einstein, who publicly recommended it in a newspaper article[9] and also privately shared his broad consent by letter (even though Einstein had to correct Petzoldt's erroneous description of the twin paradox).[10] Petzoldt handed over one of his books[P 6] to Einstein at a personal meeting, after which Einstein wrote in a letter to Petzoldt that from reading the book he noticed "with delight" that he had "long shared your convictions".[11] According to Howard, Petzoldt's philosophical "law of univocalness" may have also been influential on Einstein's "point-coincidence argument" that resolves the hole argument.[12][13] In a letter from 1919, Petzoldt thanked Einstein for recommending him to a professorship in philosophy,[14] even though that initiative proved to be unsuccessful. Petzoldt continued to defend his interpretation in the 1920s, believing that Einstein's new general theory of relativity was consistent with Machian philosophy, particularly in regard to the role that Mach's principle and all "coincidences of impressions" play in that theory.[P 9][P 10][P 11]

However, Petzoldt's radical relativistic-positivistic interpretation of relativity theory, along with insufficient technical understanding, led him to commit fundamental errors: In 1918–1919 he criticized representations of relativity theory that he believed to be reliant on "absolute" views and concepts,[P 12][P 13] causing Einstein to write that he was "disappointed" in Petzoldt whose earlier writings on relativity have been better.[15] Petzoldt also misunderstood the Ehrenfest paradox, which even an exchange of letters with Einstein in 1919 failed to clarify.[16] Petzoldt also continued to be unconvinced about the twin paradox (which he had already criticized in 1914[P 8] as "a return to absolutist thinking") as shown in a correspondence with Hans Reichenbach in 1922.[17] Petzoldt's philosophy, along with his interpretation of the theory of relativity, was increasingly criticized and rejected by other philosophers such as Reichenbach, Moritz Schlick and Ernst Cassirer in the early 1920s, at which time also Einstein moved away from Machian philosophy towards a philosophical realism and apparently ceased his relations to Petzoldt after 1920.[8][5][6]

The philosophical relationship between Petzoldt, Mach and Einstein also played a role in the controversy over a posthumously published preface to Mach's book "Optics", allegedly written by Ernst Mach in July 1913, in which he rejected the theory of relativity. Wolters[18][19][20] argues that this preface was actually not written by Ernst Mach, but a forgery by his anti-relativist son Ludwig Mach, because various sources and letters apparently show that Ernst Mach around 1913–1914 did not reject the theory of relativity, but had a very positive opinion of it. For example, there is a letter from Ernst Mach to Petzoldt dated 1 May 1914, which begins: "The accompanied letter from Einstein proves the penetration of positivist philosophy into physics; you can rejoice about it ... A year ago, philosophy as such was a mere stupidity...". From that Wolters concludes that in Mach's opinion, positivist philosophy entered modern physics through relativity theory, because relativity is perhaps the most advanced physical theory that sets the standards for philosophy, therefore positivist philosophy is no longer stupid unlike other philosophies. Thus, there is an emphatic statement of Mach in favor of relativity, written after the alleged foreword of July 1913. Wolters also alludes to the rivalry between Petzoldt and Ludwig Mach:[18] In 1921, Petzoldt published an appendix to the 8th edition of Ernst Mach's book "Mechanics", in which Petzoldt described relativity as a consequence of Ernst Mach's philosophy, while Ludwig soon afterwards published the aforementioned (forged, according to Wolters) anti-relativistic foreword in "Optics". After Petzoldt's death, Ludwig published the 9th edition of "Mechanics" in 1933, in which Petzoldt's pro-relativistic appendix was removed and a new preface appeared, in which Ludwig once again inserted (forged, according to Wolters) anti-relativistic statements of Ernst Mach.

Writings (selection)

  1. ^ Maxima, Minima und Ökonomie, 1891.
  2. ^ a b Das Gesetz der Eindeutigkeit, 1895, Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie (19), pp. 146–203.
  3. ^ Einführung in die Philosophie der Reinen Erfahrung, vol. 1 (Die Bestimmtheit der Seele), 1900 and 2 (Auf dem Wege zum Dauernden), 1904.
  4. ^ Das Weltproblem von positivistischem Standpunkte aus, 1906, Leipzig: Teubner.
  5. ^ Die Gebiete der absoluten und der relativen Bewegung, 1908, Annalen der Naturphilosophie (7), pp. 29–62.
  6. ^ a b Das Weltproblem vom Standpunkte des relativistischen Positivismus aus, 2nd edition 1912; 3rd edition 1921; 4th edition 1924
  7. ^ Die Relativitätstheorie im erkenntnistheoretischen Zusammenhange des relativistischen Positivismus, 1912. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft, Vol. 14, pp. 1055–1064.
  8. ^ a b Die Relativitätstheorie der Physik, 1914. Zeitschrift für positivistische Philosophie, Vol. 2, pp. 1–56
  9. ^ Die Stellung der Relativitätstheorie in der geistigen Entwicklung der Menschheit, Leipzig, Barth, 1921; 2. enlarged edition 1923.
  10. ^ Das Verhältnis der Machschen Gedankenwelt zur Relativitätstheorie, 1921. Appendix to the 8. edition of Ernst Mach's Die Mechanik in ihrer Entwickelung historisch-kritisch dargestellt, pp. 490ff
  11. ^ Mechanistische Naturauffassung und Relativitätstheorie, 1921. Annalen der Philosophie, 2, pp. 447–462.
  12. ^ Verbietet die Relativitätstheorie Raum und Zeit als etwas wirkliches zu denken?, 1918. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft, Vol. 20, pp. 189–201.
  13. ^ Die Unmöglichkeit mechanischer Modelle zur Veranschaulichung der Relativitätstheorie, 1919. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft, Vol. 21, pp. 495–503.
German Wikisource has original text related to this article:
  • Sonderschulen für hervorragend Befähigte. Teubner, Leipzig und Berlin 1905. (Reprint 2018: ISBN 978-0-364-32257-4)
  • Das allgemeinste Entwicklungsgesetz, 1923
  • Das natürliche Höhenziel der menschheitlichen Entwicklung, 1927

References

  1. ^ Walter Dubislav (1929). "Joseph Petzoldt in memoriam: Vortrag, gehalten am 15. Oktober 1929 in der Gesellschaft für empirische Philosophie, Ortsgruppe Berlin (in German)". Annalen der Philosophie und der philosophischen Kritik. 8 (1): 289–295. doi:10.1007/BF02898179. JSTOR 20018673.
  2. ^ Christian Herrmann (1929). "Obituary: Joseph Petzoldt". Kant-Studien. 34: 508–510. doi:10.1515/kant.1929.34.1-4.508.
  3. ^ Horst Müller (1966). "Joseph Petzoldt". Humanismus und Technik. 11 (1): 33–36.
  4. ^ Grasshoff, G., ed. (2006). Wittgenstein's World of Mechanics: Including Transcriptions of Lectures by Wittgenstein's Teacher Joseph Petzoldt and Related Texts on Mechanics. Vienna: Springer. ISBN 3211328165.
  5. ^ a b c Russo Krauss, C. (2023). The Philosophy of Joseph Petzoldt: From Mach's Positivism to Einstein's Relativity. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 9781350321465.
  6. ^ a b c Russo Krauss, C. (2023). "A Machian Interpretation of the Theory of Relativity? Joseph Petzoldt's Reading of Einstein". In Russo Krauss, C., Laino, L. (ed.). Philosophers and Einstein's Relativity: The Early Philosophical Reception of the Relativistic Revolution. Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science. Vol. 342. pp. 35–64. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-36498-3_2. ISBN 978-3-031-36497-6.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
  7. ^ Proclamation signed by Petzoldt, Einstein and others: Aufruf für die Bildung einer Gesellschaft für positivistische Philosophie, 1912, Naturwissenschaftliche Wochenschrift, Vol. 11, pp. 443–444
  8. ^ a b Hentschel, K. (1990). Interpretationen und Fehlinterpretationen der speziellen und der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie durch Zeitgenossen Albert Einsteins. Basel—Boston—Bonn: Birkhäuser. doi:10.18419/opus-7182. ISBN 978-3-7643-2438-4.; See sections 3.4.2 and 4.8.3.
  9. ^ Einstein, A. (26 April 1914), "Vom Relativitäts-Prinzip (CPAE Vol. 6)", Vossische Zeitung, 209: 33–34; See also: English translation in "CPAE Vol. 6"
  10. ^ Letter Einstein's to Petzoldt from 14. April 1914 in "The collected papers of Albert Einstein", Vol. 8a: Document 5 in German with English translation
  11. ^ Letter Einstein's to Petzoldt from 11. June 1914 in: The collected papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 8a: Document 13 in German with English translation
  12. ^ Howard, D. (1992). "Einstein and Eindeutigkeit: A Neglected Theme in the Philosophical Background to General Relativity". In Eisenstaedt J, and Kox, A.J. (ed.). Studies in the History of General Relativity. Einstein studies. Vol. 3. Boston: Birkhäuser. pp. 154–243. ISBN 0817634797.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
  13. ^ Howard, D., & Norton, J. D. (1993). "Out of the labyrinth? Einstein, Hertz, and the Göttingen answer to the hole argument" (PDF). In J. Earman, M. Janssen and J. Norton (ed.). The attraction of gravitation: new studies in the history of general relativity. Einstein studies. Vol. 5. Boston: Birkhäuser. pp. 30–62. Bibcode:1993agns.book.....E.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  14. ^ Letter Petzoldt's to Einstein from 26 July 1919 in "The collected papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 9": Document 77 in German with English translation
  15. ^ Letter Einstein's to Scheel on 17. March 1919 in: The collected papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 9: Document 9 in German.
  16. ^ Letter exchange between Einsteins and Petzoldt (1919) in: The collected papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 9: Document 77 in German with English translation, Document 93 in German with English translation, Document 95 in German with English translation.
  17. ^ Hentschel, K., ed. (1990). Die Korrespondenz Petzoldt-Reichenbach: Zur Entwicklung der wissenschaftlichen Philosophie in Berlin. Berliner Beiträge zur Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften und der Technik. Vol. 12. Berlin: Sigma. ISBN 9783928068031..
  18. ^ a b Wolters, G. (1987). Mach I, Mach II, Einstein und die Relativitätstheorie. Eine Fälschung und ihre Folgen. Berlin: de Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110846966. ISBN 9783110846966.; see letter Mach's to Petzoldt on pp. 187f.; and rivalry between Ludwig Mach and Petzoldt on pp. 365ff.
  19. ^ Wolters, G. (2011). "Mach and Einstein, or, clearing troubled waters in the history of science". In Lehner, C.; Renn, J.; Schemmel, M. (ed.). Einstein and the Changing Worldviews of Physics. Boston: Birkhäuser. pp. 39–57. doi:10.1007/978-0-8176-4940-1_3. ISBN 978-0-8176-4939-5.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
  20. ^ Wolters, G. (2019). "Mach and Relativity: A Neverending Story in HOPOSia?". In Stadler, F. (ed.). Ernst Mach – Life, Work, Influence. Vienna Circle Yearbook. Vol. 22. Cham: Springer. pp. 367–385. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-04378-0_28.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Petzoldt&oldid=1236004050"