 arose in the English School when the aforementioned difficulties began to emerge from the synthetic approach to mechanical theory. Maxwell himself was disappointed with the results of his attempt at a mechanical explanation according to the synthetic approach. Duhem says: "Undoubtedly, therefore, Maxwell found little satisfaction in the mechanism he had thought of, for he soon abandoned it to set out upon a completely different path toward the mechanical explication of electric phenomena" (Duhem 1980, 68-69). Thus Duhem and even Poincaré point out that the complicated and bizarre forms taken by the mechanical models are some of Maxwell's reasons for such a disappointment. Poincaré says: "The strangeness and complication of the hypotheses that he had been compelled to make had led him to give them up" (Poincaré 1901, ix). Certainly Poincaré does not care about the problems of the synthetic method in regard to the principle of logical unity and the principle of historical continuity because he is not methodologically committed to these principles. Maxwell seeks to develop, in order to avoid the difficulties associated with the use of mechanical models, a mechanistic method that will provide a more abstract approach to constructing physical theory. By this time mechanics already had an abstract method to construct mechanical theories, namely the Lagrangian/analytic mechanics. Maxwell adopts analytic mechanics to explain physical phenomena, giving rise to a new view of mechanical explanations. The application of analytic mechanics to the construction of mechanical theories constitutes a new version of the mechanistic program. The core of these new mechanical explanations consist of mechanisms of masses and motions. Duhem's Critical Analysis of Mechanicism and his Defense of a Formal Conception of Theoretical Physics José R. N. Chiappin – Cássio Costa Laranjeiras 44 The epistemological and methodological consequences of this analytic method are far-reaching. One of them is that the arbitrariness and indeterminacy of these invisible mechanisms of hidden masses and motions (Maxwell 1867, 50) make any empirical law susceptible to a mechanical explanation. In our view Poincaré develops the appropriate epistemological and methodological details of this view of the nature of physical theory: a pragmatist/conventionalist view. Duhem proposes to disenfranchise Poincaré's generalization of the consequences of his critical analysis of this method applied in mechanical theory to physics in general. This generalization would be legitimate if mechanical theory were the unifying framework for the whole of physics, or if it were based on purely mathematical terms. Duhem questions Poincaré's view because it is based upon strategies appropriate to mechanical theories and not to theoretical
arose in the English School when the aforementioned difficulties began to emerge from the man-made overture to mechanical theory. Maxwell himself was disappointed with the results of his attack at a mechanical explanation according to the synthetic approach. Duhem order: " Undoubtedly, therefore, Maxwell found small satisfaction in the mechanism he had thought of, for he soon abandon it to set out upon a completely unlike path toward the mechanical explication of electric phenomena " (Duhem 1980, 68 - 69). Thus Duhem and even Poincaré point out that the complicated and bizarre forms taken by the mechanical models are some of Maxwell's reason for such a disappointment. Poincaré says: " The strangeness and complication of the guess that he had been compelled to make had led him to yield them up " (Poincaré 1901, ix). Certainly Poincaré does not care about the problems of the synthetic method in attentiveness to the principle of logical unity and the principle of historical continuity because he is not methodologically entrust to these principle. Maxwell seeks to develop, in order to avoid the difficulties associated with the habit of mechanical model, a mechanistic method that will provide a more abstract overture to constructing physical theory. By this time automobile mechanic already had an abstract method to construct mechanical theories, namely the Lagrangian / analytic automobile mechanic. Maxwell adopts analytic mechanics to explain physical phenomena, giving advance to a new view of mechanical explanations. The application of analytic automobile mechanic to the construction of mechanical theory constitutes a new version of the mechanistic program. The core of these newfangled mechanical explanations consist of mechanisms of masse and motions. Duhem's Critical Analysis of Mechanicism and his Defense of a Formal Conception of Theoretical Physics José R. N. Chiappin – Cássio Costa Laranjeiras 44 The epistemological and methodological consequences of this analytic method are far - reach. One of them is that the arbitrariness and indeterminacy of these invisible mechanisms of hidden mass and motions (Maxwell 1867, 50) reach any empirical police susceptible to a mechanical explanation. In our view Poincaré develops the appropriate epistemological and methodological details of this view of the nature of forcible theory: a pragmatist / conventionalist view. Duhem proposes to disenfranchise Poincaré's abstraction of the consequences of his critical analysis of this method applied in mechanical hypothesis to physics in general. This generalization would be legitimate if mechanical hypothesis were the unifying framework for the whole of physics, or if it were based on purely mathematical terms. Duhem question Poincaré's view because it is based upon strategies appropriate to mechanical theories and not to theoretical
 arlse in the English Schoou when the aforgmwntionxd diffjculties began to emerge from the syitheric akiroach to mechanical gheory. Maqwell himwelf qas disappointed wlch ths resblvs of his attemkt at a mechdnical explanadiun according to the synthetic approacr. Duhem swys: "Undoubtedli, thegesore, Maxwell found little satisfaction in the mechanism he had thought of, for he sooj abwndoned it to set lut upon a xompjwtely differdnt path toward the medhanical explication of electriz pheuomena" (Duhen 1980, 68-69). Tjos Duhem and even Poincaré poikn out tvat the complicated akd bivarrw forms taken by the kechanical models wre some mf Maxwell's reasons fir suwh a disxppokntjeit. Loincagé seys: "The strzngeness ane complication of tne yypotheses thzt he raq been compelled to make had led him to gibe them up" (Poincaré 1901, ix). Xertainly Poincaré doed not carq about the problems of the synthetic method in ragard go uhc oeijciple of logical unity and the principle of rjsuorpcal continuity bccause he is not mrtjocjlogically coomitteb tk these principles. Maxwelj seejs to devtlop, on order to avoid the diffixulties assobiatwd with the use of mechanical modgls, a kechanistic method that wilm provide a more absffact approach to cokstsucting kfysical theory. By this timx meckanics aureacy had an abstraft mebvod to construct mfchanncal dheories, nwmely the Lagrangian/analytic merianics. Maxwelk ddoits analycic meghanics to explwin physical pkenomena, givivg rise to a new tiew of mechwnical explandjions. The appnication of qnalttic mezfanics to the vonstructpou of mechqnical theories cokstitotss a new versiou if the mechanisyic prjggam. Tra core of thase vew kechavical explakatkons consist of mechanisks or masses and motioms. Duhem's Xritical Analysis of Kechanicism and hid Defxnse oh a Fotmaj Conception of Theoretical Phgsics José R. K. Chiappin – Cáfsio Costa Laranleiras 44 The epistemological and methodoligical consequencgs of this analytic mgthpd are far-rxachind. One of dhem is that the arbutrariness and inceterminacy of these jnvisitle mfchanisms of hidden masses and motions (Maxwell 1867, 50) make any empirical law sysceptmbje to a mecganival eqplcnacion. In our tiew Poincaré devekops the appropriate epistemolojical and kechodological details of this fidw of the natore of physical theory: a pdagmatisy/conventionalist view. Duhem proloses to disenfranchise Ioincaré's tenerzlizatpkn of the consequencrs of kis crutical qnalnsis of this mdthpd applied ln mtchauical theory to physics in generao. This gfneralization wonld be legitlmxte ir mechwnical theory wede tgf uniwying framewotk for the whoke of physics, or if pt rere based on kurely mathematocal jzgms. Duhem quextions Poinwaré's view because it is based upon strategies approkriate to mtchanical vheories and npv to theoretical
arose in the English School when the began emerge from synthetic approach to disappointed the results of attempt at a explanation according to the synthetic approach. says: "Undoubtedly, therefore, Maxwell found little satisfaction in the mechanism he had thought for he soon abandoned it to set out upon a completely different path the explication electric (Duhem 1980, 68-69). Thus Duhem and even Poincaré point out that the complicated and bizarre forms by the mechanical models are some of Maxwell's for such a disappointment. says: "The strangeness and complication the that he been to had led him give them up" (Poincaré 1901, ix). Certainly Poincaré does not care about the problems of the synthetic in regard principle of unity the of historical continuity is not methodologically committed to these to develop, in order to avoid the difficulties with the of mechanical models, a mechanistic method will provide a more abstract approach to constructing theory. By this time mechanics already had an abstract method to construct mechanical theories, namely mechanics. Maxwell adopts analytic to explain physical giving to new of mechanical The application of analytic mechanics to the construction of mechanical theories a new version of the mechanistic program. The core of mechanical consist of mechanisms masses and motions. Duhem's Analysis Mechanicism and his Defense Formal of R. Chiappin Cássio Costa Laranjeiras 44 epistemological and methodological consequences of analytic method are far-reaching. the arbitrariness and indeterminacy of these invisible mechanisms hidden masses and motions (Maxwell 1867, 50) any empirical law susceptible to a mechanical explanation. In our view Poincaré the appropriate methodological details of this view of the nature physical theory: a pragmatist/conventionalist Duhem proposes to disenfranchise Poincaré's generalization of the consequences his analysis of method applied in theory to physics general. This generalization legitimate if theory the the whole of physics, or if were on purely mathematical terms. Duhem Poincaré's it is based upon strategies appropriate to mechanical theories and not to theoretical
 arose in the English School whEn the aforeMentiOneD diFfIculTies Began to emerge fROm thE synthetic approach to meChaniCaL TheoRY. MAxwelL himselF WaS DIsaPpOiNteD wITh The reSulTs of his Attempt at a MecHaNical explanaTIoN according To tHe synthetic aPprOach. DuHeM saYS: "UndoUbtEdly, tHerefoRE, MaxweLl found liTtLE satisFAction iN THe MechAnism he had thought OF, fOR he soon abandonEd it to SeT OuT UPon A coMpletely diFfErent PAth towaRD tHE MEchANical explicatIon of electrIC phEnomenA" (DUheM 1980, 68-69). thus DuHem anD eVEn POincaré poinT out That the coMplicaTEd and biZArre forMs takeN by The MechANiCaL moDeLS arE SoMe oF maxWell's reaSoNs For suCh a dISAPPoinTmeNt. PoIncarÉ says: "The stranGenEss aND coMplicAtion Of thE hYpothEses thAt he hAd Been compelled to Make Had led him To gIvE thEm Up" (PoiNCaré 1901, ix). cerTaiNly PoinCaré doeS Not CaRE ABoUt the problems of the SyNTHeTic methoD in regARd To THe princiPlE of LogiCAL unitY and THe PrinciplE of hisTOrIcAl contiNuIty becAuSe hE is Not meTHodoLogicaLly commiTted tO These principleS. maxwell seeks tO DeVELoP, In orDer To avoid the dIffiCUltiEs asSOcIatED with The usE oF MeCHanical models, a mechaNiStic meThod tHat will providE a more abstRACT approacH to cONsTRucting physicaL theoRy. By this tiME mechaniCs alrEady had aN abstract METhod to coNstRucT meChaNICaL theories, nameLY The LAgRangian/AnaLytic meChaNicS. MaXweLl Adopts anaLytic mecHaNiCs To ExpLain pHYsical phEnOmeNa, GivIng riSE to a neW view Of meChAnICal ExplanaTIoNS. the aPpLiCatiOn oF aNalytIc meCHanIcs to thE construcTioN Of meChAnIcal theOries constituTeS a new versiOn Of tHe mechANIstic proGram. The core of these new meCHanical ExpLanatIons Consist of MecHanismS of MAsses aNd motiOns. DuHeM's CRITical aNAlYsiS oF MechaniciSM And His DeFeNse oF a FormaL Conception of TheorETicAl Physics José r. N. CHiapPIN – CÁssIO COSta laRAnjEIRas 44 The epistemolOgical and mEtHOdOlogical coNSeqUeNces of tHis analYtic mEThod are Far-reachiNg. One of thEm Is thAT The ArbitrarinEss and inDeterminaCY of thESe InvisIblE mechaNiSms Of hidDen masSEs aNd motIons (MaXwEll 1867, 50) makE any eMpIrical laW susceptible to a mechanicAl explAnatiOn. IN our view POinCAré Develops tHe apPropriate ePisTemOlogiCal ANd metHodoLOgIcaL DetaiLs of THis view of THe NatURE oF physical thEORY: a pRagmaTisT/ConvenTionAlist view. Duhem proPOses to disenfraNchiSE poiNcaRÉ's geNeRalization of thE coNsEQUences of HiS critical anAlysis of ThIS methOd applIed in mEchanicAL ThEOry to pHysiCs iN general. THis GeNEralizaTiOn WOuld be LegiTiMate if MechanICal tHEOry were the unifyiNg fraMEWork fOR thE wholE oF physicS, Or if It were baseD on purely maThematIcal Terms. duhem quEsTions POinCaRé's view becAUse it is baSed upOn stratEgIes aPprOpriatE to mECHanicAl thEoRieS and not to THEoREtIcAL
 arose in the English Scho ol when th e afo rem ent io neddiff iculties began to e merge from the synthet ic ap pr o acht omecha nical t h eo r y . M ax we llhi m se lf wa s d isappoi nted withthe  r esults of hi s  a ttempt ata m echanical ex pla nation  a cco r dingtothe s ynthet i c appr oach. Duh em says:" Undoubt e d ly , th erefore, Maxwellf ou n d little satis factio ni nt h e m ech anism he h ad  thou g ht of,f or h e  so o n abandoned i t to set ou t  up on a c om ple t ely di ffere nt pat h toward th e me chanicalexplic a tion of electri c phen ome na"  (Du h em  1 980 ,6 8-6 9 ).  Th u s D uhem and  e ve n Poi ncar é p o intout  tha t the  complicatedand  biz a rre  form s tak en b ythe m echani cal m od els are some of  Max well's re aso ns  fo rsucha  disap poi ntm ent. Po incarés ays :" T h estrangeness and co mp l i ca tion ofthe hy p ot he s es thathe  ha d be e n  comp elle d  t o make h ad led hi mto give  t hem up "(Po inc aré 1 9 01,ix). C ertainly  Poin c aré does not c a re about thep ro b l em s  ofthe  syntheticmeth o d in  reg a rd  to the p rinci pl e  o f  logical unity andth e prin ciple  of historica l continui t y becausehe i s  n o t methodologic allycommittedt o theseprinc iples. M axwell se e k s to dev elo p,inord e r  t o avoid the d i f ficu lt ies ass oci ated wi ththe  us e o fmechanica l models ,ame ch ani sticm ethod th at  wi ll  pr ovide a more  abst ract  a pp r oac h to co n st r u ctin gph ysic alth eory.  Byt his  time m echanicsalr e adyha dan abst ract method t oconstructme cha nicalt h eories,namely the Lagrangian/a n alyticmec hanic s. M axwell ad opt s anal yti c  mecha nics t o exp la inp h ysica l ph eno me na, giving r ise  to a  n ew v iew ofmechanical explana t ion s. The applic ati on o f an aly t ic mec ha n ics t o the construct ion of mec ha n ic al theorie s  co ns titutes  a newversi o n of th e mechani stic prog ra m. T h e  co re of thes e new me chanicale xplan a ti ons c ons ist of  m ech anism s of m a sse s and  motio ns . Duhe m's C ri tical An alysis of Mechanicism a nd his  Defe nse  of a For mal Con ception o f Th eoreticalPhy sic s Jos é R .  N. C hiap p in  –C ássio  Cos t a Laranje i ra s 4 4 Th e epistemol o g i cal  andmet h odolog ical  consequences oft his analytic m etho d are  fa r -rea ch ing. One of th emis t hat thear bitrariness  and ind et e rmina cy oftheseinvisib l e  m e chanis ms o f h idden mas ses  a n d motio ns  ( M axwell  186 7,  50) m ake an y  emp i r ical law suscept iblet o  a me c han icalex planati o n. I n our view  Poincaré d evelop s th e app ropriat eepiste mol og ical and m e thodologi cal d etailsof  thi s v iew of  the n ature  ofph ysi cal theor y :  a pr ag m ati st/c onven ti onal ist view. Duhem pr opo s es to d is enf r a nchise Po i n caré's gen era lizat i o n of the c o nseq u en c es of  his c ritica l analy s isof  this m eth o d  appliedin mechan i cal  t heor y to phy si cs i ngen er al. This genera lization  would b e legiti mat e  ifm echani ca l theory wer e the  u n ifyingf r ame work fo r  th e w hol e of  ph ysic s , or if it were based on  pur ely m a the matic al te rm s. Duhem ques tions Po i ncaré's viewbecause it is b a sed upon  st r at eg ies appro pri a te to  mec han ical  th eori e s  and nott otheo retica l
 arose_in the_English School when the_aforementioned difficulties_began_to emerge_from_the synthetic approach_to mechanical theory._Maxwell himself was disappointed_with the results_of_his attempt at a mechanical explanation according to the synthetic approach. Duhem says: "Undoubtedly,_therefore,_Maxwell found_little_satisfaction_in the mechanism he had_thought of, for he soon_abandoned it_to set out upon a completely different path_toward_the mechanical explication_of electric phenomena" (Duhem 1980, 68-69). Thus Duhem and_even Poincaré point out that the_complicated and bizarre_forms_taken_by the mechanical models_are some of Maxwell's reasons for_such a disappointment. Poincaré says: "The_strangeness and complication of the hypotheses that_he had been compelled to make_had led him to give_them up"_(Poincaré 1901, ix). Certainly Poincaré_does not care_about the_problems of the_synthetic method in regard to the_principle of logical_unity and the principle of historical_continuity_because he is_not_methodologically_committed to_these principles. Maxwell_seeks_to develop,_in_order to avoid the difficulties associated_with_the use of mechanical models, a mechanistic_method that will provide_a_more abstract approach to_constructing physical theory. By this_time mechanics already had an abstract_method to_construct mechanical_theories, namely the Lagrangian/analytic mechanics. Maxwell adopts analytic mechanics to explain_physical phenomena, giving rise to a_new view of mechanical_explanations. The_application_of analytic mechanics_to_the construction_of mechanical theories constitutes a new version_of the_mechanistic program. The core of these_new mechanical explanations consist_of_mechanisms of masses and motions. Duhem's_Critical Analysis of Mechanicism and his_Defense of a Formal Conception_of_Theoretical_Physics José R. N. Chiappin_– Cássio Costa Laranjeiras 44 The_epistemological and methodological_consequences of this analytic method are far-reaching._One_of them is that the arbitrariness_and_indeterminacy of these invisible mechanisms of_hidden_masses_and motions (Maxwell 1867, 50)_make any empirical law susceptible to_a mechanical explanation. In our view Poincaré develops the_appropriate epistemological and_methodological details of this view_of_the_nature of physical theory: a pragmatist/conventionalist view. Duhem proposes to_disenfranchise Poincaré's_generalization of the_consequences of his critical analysis of this method applied in_mechanical theory to physics in general. This_generalization would be legitimate if mechanical theory were the unifying framework_for the whole of physics, or if it_were based on purely mathematical terms. Duhem_questions Poincaré's view because_it_is based upon strategies appropriate to mechanical_theories_and_not_to theoretical