hem's thought that transits from these Thomist terms of cause' and 'effect', towards a more constructive version that emphasizes the dialogue thesis. The last part of the book consists of three historical studies. Roberto Estrada makes a historical inquiry about the origin and nature of the notion of "saving the phenomena" in science. As is well known, the problem is that different hypotheses may be equally suitable to represent the same phenomenon. Estrada argues that it is not at all clear when exactly this concept was formulated for the first time. The only certainty is that it began to be used at the beginning of the Christian era. In his work, Roberto Sánchez also makes a historical inquiry around Duhem's studies on Leonardo Da Vinci. In general, Sanchez traces the sources from which Leonardo developed his scientific ideas, as well as the way in which the thought of this genius influenced the development of certain aspects of the science of his time. Finally, Víctor Hernandez outlines the possible relationships between the philosophical positions developed by Louis Couturat and Duhem. Hernandez holds that, since an analogy is a type of inductive argument, there are at least two reasons why Duhem's demonstration by reductio ad absurdum of the principle of mathematical induction would not have been accepted by Couturat. The first reason is that the proof developed by Duhem ignores the achievements of the new mathematical logic of his time. The second is that such proof must show that the principle of induction is analytic in the sense that it accomplishes with purely logical concepts and axioms. Indeed, Duhem's emphasis on logic within physical theory brings him closer to English contemporary logicians, says Hernandez (2016, 190), forcing us to reexamine the nature of his supposedly "conventionalist" stance based in the Duhemian hypertrophy around the spirit of fineness to the detriment of the spirit of geometry. In general, the book offers a clear line of research that serves as the guiding thread along the seven chapters, expressed accurately in book's title: Pierre Duhem: between physics and metaphysics. Although each one of the texts approaches the subject from a different angle, it is possible to appreciate certain dialogue between the authors. The depth and conceptual clarity with which each author develops his arguments, shows us that each one of the texts is well documented. The book exhibits an expository cadence that is the result of the thematic coherence demanded in a text written for specialists in the subject. 160 Transversal: International Journal for the Histori
hem's thought that transits from these Thomist terms of cause' and' consequence', towards a more constructive interpretation that emphasizes the dialogue thesis. The final part of the book consist of three diachronic studies. Roberto Estrada make a historical inquiry about the lineage and nature of the notion of " saving the phenomenon " in skill. As is well known, the problem is that different guess may be equally suitable to typify the same phenomenon. Estrada argues that it is not at all absolved when exactly this concept was formulated for the first time. The lone certainty is that it began to be used at the beginning of the Christian era. In his work, Roberto Sánchez also make a historical inquiry around Duhem's studies on Leonardo Da Vinci. In general, Sanchez traces the source from which Leonardo developed his scientific ideas, as well as the way in which the thought of this genius influenced the development of certain aspects of the skill of his clock time. Finally, Víctor Hernandez delineate the possible relationships between the philosophical positions explicate by Louis Couturat and Duhem. Hernandez holds that, since an analogy is a type of inductive argument, there constitute at least two reasons why Duhem's demonstration by reductio ad absurdum of the principle of mathematical induction would not have been accept by Couturat. The first reason is that the proof developed by Duhem ignores the achievements of the fresh mathematical logic of his time. The second is that such proof must show that the principle of evocation is analytic in the sense that it accomplishes with purely coherent concepts and axioms. Indeed, Duhem's emphasis on logic within physical hypothesis brings him closer to English contemporary logicians, says Hernandez (2016, 190), storm us to reexamine the nature of his purportedly " conventionalist " stance based in the Duhemian hypertrophy around the spirit of fineness to the detriment of the heart of geometry. In general, the book offers a clear line of inquiry that serves as the guiding thread along the seven chapter, expressed accurately in book's title: Pierre Duhem: between physics and metaphysics. Although each one of the texts approach the subject from a different slant, it is possible to appreciate certain dialogue between the authors. The depth and conceptual clarity with which each generator develops his arguments, shows us that each one of the texts is well documented. The book exhibit an expository meter that is the result of the thematic coherence demanded in a text written for specialists in the subject. 160 Transversal: International Journal for the Histori
hem'd thought that transits nrom these Thomist termv of czuse' and 'effect', towards a more constcuctuve vtgsion that emphasizes the diallgue thewis. Uhe last part of vge book consiabs of vhree historicak studies. Soberto Estradd oanes a historical inquiry about the jrigin snf nature of thg notpog of "saving the phenomena" in science. Aa is wenl known, the lroblem is that different jypohheses may be equaply suitablg to eepresent thd same phenomenon. Estrzda argues that it is not at alu clecr when exaxtoy hvis concept was sormulated for the fhrst tike. The only cevtainvy iw that it began to be used at the beginging of tve Christian era. In hus wotk, Rotertu Sánzhee aksk maked a historicam inquiry aeound Duhem's studiex jb Leonardo Da Vinci. Ig general, Sanchez traces the sources frmm shich Leonardo developee his scientific idead, as well as the way in which the thought of this genius itflueicdd uhc awvflopment of certain aspects of the science of gix nime. Finally, Víctov Hernandez outlinrs tng possible relxtionskjpa between the phillsophicwl powitions dtveloled by Louis Couturat and Dyhem. Hernandvz hilds that, since an analogy is a tipe of inductive argument, thexe are at least tao reasona why Duhem's demovstgatimn by reductio ad absurdum of the pcinci'le of mxthekaticaj inductioj would not have been acfepteb by Wouturat. Tje first reason is that the proof developed bi Dghek ignoref the achievements of the new majhematicaj logkc of his nime. The vecond is trat such proox must show tiat the pwincuple of indjztion is analyyic in thv fensw that it accomplixher with purely loyncql concepts and axkomf. Pndxed, Dtvem's emphasiv on loeoc wighin physiccl thepry brings him closes to English contemporsrn logiciabs, says Rernandez (2016, 190), fprcing us to reexaline vhe navure og hys supposedly "conventionalist" atance baded in the Duheiian hypertrophy around the spirit of fineness to the dxtriment of the spirit if geometry. In genetal, the book ohfers w clear lhne of research that serves as the gulding thread along the seven chaphers, expressed accurately in book's title: Pierre Duhem: between physics and metapiyfics. Althoufh esch ote pf the texvs approaches the xubject from a different angle, mt is posshbje to appreciate certain diakoeue between tfe authors. The depth and conceptial clarity with which each autnor develops his argumenbs, shows ys thzt each onx of the texts is wekl docbmentee. The biok cxhibits an exoosotlry cadenfe tiat is the result of the thematic ciherenxe demanded in a txxt written nov specpalists in the subject. 160 Trahdversxl: Internatiomal Journal fot the Histori
hem's thought that transits from these Thomist cause' 'effect', towards more constructive version The part of the consists of three studies. Roberto Estrada makes a historical about the origin and nature of the notion of "saving the phenomena" in As is well known, the problem is that different hypotheses may be equally to the phenomenon. argues that it is not at all clear when exactly this concept was formulated for the time. The only certainty is that it began be used at the of the Christian era. In work, Sánchez also a inquiry Duhem's studies on Da Vinci. In general, Sanchez traces the sources from which Leonardo developed his scientific ideas, as well the way the thought this influenced development of certain the science of his time. Finally, the possible relationships between the philosophical positions developed Louis Couturat Duhem. Hernandez holds that, since an is a type of inductive argument, there are least two reasons why Duhem's demonstration by reductio ad absurdum of the principle of mathematical not have been accepted Couturat. The first is the developed Duhem ignores achievements of the new mathematical logic of his time. The second that such proof must show that the principle of induction in sense that it with purely logical concepts axioms. Duhem's emphasis on logic theory him contemporary says (2016, 190), forcing us reexamine the nature of his "conventionalist" stance based in spirit of fineness to the detriment of the of geometry. In general, the book offers clear line of research that serves as the guiding thread along the chapters, expressed book's title: Pierre Duhem: between physics and metaphysics. each one of the approaches the subject from a different angle, it is to certain dialogue the authors. The and conceptual clarity which each author arguments, shows that one is well documented. The book exhibits expository that is the result of thematic in a text written for specialists in the subject. 160 Transversal: International Journal for the
hem's thought that transits frOm these ThoMist tErmS of CaUse' aNd 'efFect', towards a moRE conStructive version that emPhasiZeS The dIAlOgue tHesis. ThE LaST ParT oF tHe bOoK CoNsistS of Three hiStorical stUdiEs. roberto EstraDA mAkes a histoRicAl inquiry aboUt tHe origIn And NAture Of tHe notIon of "sAVing thE phenomenA" iN SciencE. as is welL KNoWn, thE problem is that difFErENt hypotheses maY be equAlLY sUITabLe tO represent ThE same PHenomenON. ESTRAda ARgues that it is Not at all cleAR whEn exacTlY thIS concePt was FoRMulAted for the fIrst Time. The onLy certAInty is tHAt it begAn to be UseD at The bEGiNnIng Of THe CHRiStiAN erA. In his woRk, roBerto sáncHEZ ALso mAkeS a hiStoriCal inquiry aroUnd duheM'S stUdies On LeoNardO DA VincI. In genEral, SAnChez traces the soUrceS from whicH LeOnArdO dEveloPEd his sCieNtiFic ideaS, as well AS thE wAY IN wHich the thought of thIs GENiUs influeNced thE DeVeLOpment of CeRtaIn asPECts of The sCIeNce of his Time. FiNAlLy, víctor HErNandez OuTliNes The poSSiblE relatIonships BetweEN the philosophiCAl positions deVElOPEd BY LouIs COuturat and DUhem. hErnaNdez HOlDs tHAt, sinCe an aNaLOgY Is a type of inductive aRgUment, tHere aRe at least two rEasons why DUHEM's demonsTratIOn BY reductio ad absUrdum Of the princIPle of matHematIcal induCtion woulD NOt have beEn aCcePteD by cOUtUrat. The first rEASon iS tHat the pRooF develoPed By DUheM igNoRes the achIevementS oF tHe NeW maThemaTIcal logiC oF hiS tIme. the seCOnd is tHat suCh prOoF mUSt sHow that THe PRInciPlE oF indUctIoN is anAlytIC in The sensE that it acComPLishEs WiTh purelY logical concePtS and axioms. inDeeD, Duhem'S EMphasis oN logic within physical theORy bringS hiM closEr to english coNteMporarY loGIcians, Says HeRnandEz (2016, 190), ForCINg us tO REeXamInE the nature OF His SuppoSeDly "cOnventiOnalist" stance based IN thE Duhemian hypeRtrOphy AROuNd tHE sPIriT oF FinENEss to the detrimeNt of the spiRiT Of Geometry. In GEneRaL, the booK offers A cleaR Line of rEsearch thAt serves aS tHe guIDIng Thread alonG the seveN chapters, EXpresSEd AccurAteLy in boOk'S tiTle: PiErre DuHEm: bEtweeN physiCs And metAphysIcS. AlthougH each one of the texts approAches tHe subJecT from a difFerENt aNgle, it is pOssiBle to appreCiaTe cErtaiN diALogue BetwEEn The AUthorS. The DEpth and coNCePtuAL ClArity with whICH EacH authOr dEVelops His aRguments, shows us thAT each one of the tExts IS WelL doCUmenTeD. The book exhibiTs aN eXPOsitory cAdEnce that is tHe result Of THe theMatic cOherenCe demanDED iN A text wRittEn fOr specialIstS iN The subjEcT. 160 TRAnsverSal: INtErnatiOnal JoURnal FOR the Histori
hem's thought that transit s from the se Th omi stte rmsof c ause' and 'eff e ct',  towards a more constr uctiv ev ersi o nthatemphasi z es t hedi al ogu et he sis.The  last p art of the  bo ok  consists of th ree histor ica l studies. R obe rto Es tr ada makes  ahisto ricali nquiry  about th eo rigina nd natu r e  o f th e notion of "savi n gt he phenomena"in sci en c e. A s i s w ell known,  t he pr o blem is th a t dif f erent hypothe ses may bee qua lly su it abl e  to re prese nt the  same pheno meno n. Estrad a argu e s thati t is no t at a llcle ar w h en  e xac tl y  th i scon c ept  was for mu la ted f or t h e f irst  ti me.The o nly certainty  is  tha t  it  bega n tobe u se d atthe be ginni ng  of the Christi an e ra. In hi s w or k,Ro berto Sánche z a lso  makesa histo r ica li n q ui ry around Duhem'sst u d ie s on Leo nardoD aVi n ci. In g en era l, S a n cheztrac e sthe sour ces fr o mwh ich Leo na rdo de ve lop edhis s c ient ific i deas, as  well as the way inw hich the thou g ht o ft hisgen ius influen cedt he d evel o pm ent of ce rtain  a s pe c ts of the science o fhis ti me. F inally, Vícto r Hernande z o utlinesthep os s ible relations hipsbetween th e  philoso phica l positi ons devel o p ed by Lo uis  Co utu rat a nd  Duhem. Herna n d ez h ol ds that , s ince an  an alo gyisatype of i nductive  a rg um en t,there are at l ea sttw o r eason s  why D uhem' s de mo ns t rat ion byr ed u c tioad  a bsur dum  o f the  pri n cip le of m athematic ali nduc ti on  wouldnot have been  a ccepted by  C out urat.T h e firstreason is that the proo f  develo ped  by D uhem  ignoresthe  achie vem e nts of  the n ew ma th ema t i cal l o g ic  of  h is time. T h e  se condis  tha t suchproof must show th a t t he principleofindu c t io n i s  a n aly ti c  in t he sense that i t accompli sh e swith purel y  lo gi cal con cepts a nd ax i oms. In deed, Duh em's emph as is o n log ic withinphysical  theory b r ingsh im  clos erto Eng li shconte mporar y  lo gicia ns, sa ys  Herna ndez(2 016, 190 ), forcing us to reexam ine th e nat ure  of his s upp o sed ly "conve ntio nalist" st anc e b asedint he Du hemi a nhyp e rtrop hy a r ound thes pi rit o ffineness to t h e d etrim ent of the  spi rit of geometry.I n general, the  boo k off ers a cl ea r line of rese arc ht h at serve sas the guid ing thre ad along  the s even c hapters , ex p ressed  acc ura tely in b ook 's title:Pi er r e Duhe m: b et ween p hysics andm e taphysics. Altho ugh e a c h one ofthe t ex ts appr o ache s the subj ect from adiffer entangle , it is  p ossibl e t oappreciate certain d ialog ue betw ee n th e a uthors . Th e depth  and  c onc eptual cl a r it y  w it h  wh icheachau thor  develops his argu men t s, show sust h at eac h  o n e  of the te xts  is w e l l document e d. T h eb ook e xhibit s an e xposito r y c ad ence th ati s  the resu lt of the the ma ticcoherenc edema nd edin  a text written  for spe cialists i n thesub j ect. 160 Tr an sversal: Int ernat io n al Jour n a l f or theH ist ori 
hem's thought_that transits_from these Thomist terms_of cause'_and_'effect', towards_a_more constructive version_that emphasizes the_dialogue thesis. The last_part of the_book_consists of three historical studies. Roberto Estrada makes a historical inquiry about the origin_and_nature of_the_notion_of "saving the phenomena" in_science. As is well known,_the problem_is that different hypotheses may be equally suitable_to_represent the same_phenomenon. Estrada argues that it is not at all_clear when exactly this concept was_formulated for the_first_time._The only certainty is_that it began to be used_at the beginning of the Christian_era. In his work, Roberto Sánchez also_makes a historical inquiry around Duhem's_studies on Leonardo Da Vinci._In general,_Sanchez traces the sources from_which Leonardo developed_his scientific_ideas, as well_as the way in which the_thought of this_genius influenced the development of certain_aspects_of the science_of_his_time. Finally,_Víctor Hernandez outlines_the_possible relationships_between_the philosophical positions developed by Louis_Couturat_and Duhem. Hernandez holds that, since an_analogy is a type_of_inductive argument, there are_at least two reasons why_Duhem's demonstration by reductio ad absurdum_of the_principle of_mathematical induction would not have been accepted by Couturat. The first_reason is that the proof developed_by Duhem ignores the_achievements of_the_new mathematical logic_of_his time._The second is that such proof must_show that_the principle of induction is analytic_in the sense that_it_accomplishes with purely logical concepts and_axioms. Indeed, Duhem's emphasis on logic_within physical theory brings him_closer_to_English contemporary logicians, says Hernandez_(2016, 190), forcing us to reexamine_the nature of_his supposedly "conventionalist" stance based in the_Duhemian_hypertrophy around the spirit of fineness_to_the detriment of the spirit of_geometry._In_general, the book offers a_clear line of research that serves_as the guiding thread along the seven chapters, expressed_accurately in book's_title: Pierre Duhem: between physics_and_metaphysics._Although each one of the texts approaches the subject from_a different_angle, it is_possible to appreciate certain dialogue between the authors. The depth_and conceptual clarity with which each author_develops his arguments, shows us that each one of the texts_is well documented. The book exhibits an expository_cadence that is the result of the_thematic coherence demanded in_a_text written for specialists in the subject._160_Transversal:_International_Journal for the_Histori