 is first mechanical. Duhem clearly states this methodological principle: "A branch of physics cannot be transformed into a mathematical theory unless it becomes a mechanical theory. For a century, this principle has guided the efforts of the physicist geometricians" (Duhem 1901, 131). Duhem disputes this principle which, for him, conflicts with the true principle that guides the construction of mathematical physics. He replaces it with what he understands to be the correct principle to make theoretical physics mathematical, the measurement theory; vii) an implicit commitment to physics as a rational system and method of constructing physical theory. This method, as noted above, requires the use of well-established concepts and postulates from physical theory and of rational arguments (in the form of mathematical deductions) to obtain empirical laws from its theoretical basis. The Mechanical Theory and its Two Versions: Synthetic and Analytic Duhem's analysis of mechanicism is organized around his criticism of two methods for applying mechanical theory to explain physical phenomena: the "synthetic method" and the "analytic method". Duhem states such an idea clearly when he says: The attempts made at explicating mechanically the physical phenomena that the universe presents fall into two categories. The attempts in the first category are carried out according to a method that can aptly be named the synthetic method [...]; in the eyes of the majority of physicists, the synthetic method no longer seems capable of giving a mechanical and complete explication of natural phenomena; it is, then, the analytic method that one requires today for such an explication (Duhem 1980, 95; 1905, 180-181). These are two different views of the mechanical method of constructing physical theories. Duhem's criticism of mechanicism is the criticism of these two methods of constructing mechanical theories. Each of these mechanical methods of construction leads to different views of what mechanical explanation and theoretical physics mean and aim for. Duhem critically examines the problems and difficulties affecting both approaches, evaluating them critically regarding their capacities to provide a general and unifying mechanical explanation of physics and to make the development of physics continuous and rational. Further, they are evaluated on the basis of his own view of physical theory as a rational system, that is to say a system of physical laws represented by a few formal principles. The Synthetic Method and its Two Versions: The English School and the Classical Rationalism / Continental School Duhem argues, from the beginning, that the use of mechanical theories is not sufficient to distinguish between the English School and the Continental School or the metaphysical view of physics.
is first mechanical. Duhem clearly states this methodological principle: " A outgrowth of purgative cannot be transformed into a mathematical hypothesis unless it becomes a mechanical hypothesis. For a century, this principle has guide the campaign of the physicist geometricians " (Duhem 1901, 131). Duhem challenge this principle which, for him, conflicts with the on-key principle that guides the structure of mathematical physics. He replaces it with what he understands to be the correct principle to make theoretical purgative mathematical, the measurement theory; vii) an implicit commitment to physics as a intellectual system and method of constructing physical theory. This method acting, as noted above, want the use of well - established concepts and postulate from physical theory and of rational arguments (in the form of mathematical deduction) to prevail empirical laws from its theoretical basis. The Mechanical Theory and its Two Versions: Synthetic and Analytic Duhem's analysis of mechanicism is organized around his criticism of two methods for applying mechanical hypothesis to excuse physical phenomena: the " synthetic method acting " and the " analytic method acting ". Duhem states such an idea clearly when he says: The attempts made at explicating mechanically the physical phenomenon that the universe presents fall into two categories. The attempts in the first class are carried out according to a method that can aptly be named the synthetic method [... ]; in the eye of the majority of physicists, the synthetic method no longer seems capable of give a mechanical and complete explication of natural phenomena; it is, then, the analytic method acting that one requires today for such an explication (Duhem 1980, 95; 1905, 180 - 181). These are two unlike views of the mechanical method of constructing physical theories. Duhem's criticism of mechanicism is the criticism of these two method acting of constructing mechanical theories. Each of these mechanical method of construction contribute to different horizon of what mechanical explanation and theoretical physics think of and aim for. Duhem critically examines the trouble and difficulty affecting both approaches, evaluating them critically regarding their capacities to provide a general and unifying mechanical explanation of physics and to stool the development of physics continuous and intellectual. Further, they are evaluated on the basis of his own view of physical theory as a rational organization, that is to say a system of physical laws represented by a few formal principle. The Synthetic Method and its Two adaptation: The English School and the Classical Rationalism / Continental School Duhem argue, from the beginning, that the use of mechanical theories is not sufficient to distinguish between the English School and the Continental School or the metaphysical view of physics.
 is first mechanical. Duhem glearly states tkus metiodologjcal privciple: "A branch of physics cennor be ugansformed into a matfematical theory ynleww it becomxa a mecmcnicam themcy. For a centuri, this princhple has guideg ghz efforts of the physicist geometricyans" (Dunel 1901, 131). Duhem dispotes uhif prjnciple which, for him, conflicts wifh the urue principle thay guides the construction lf mwthematical physicd. He replacga ie with what hd understands to be thg correct principle to make theofeticcl physics narheldtical, the neasugement theory; vii) an hmpliciy commitment tp piysixs as a rational systxm and method of conftructing pkysical theory. This mwtyod, av noded xvovd, rtqumrea the kse of well-esfablished cincepts and postulaues drom physical theorr wnd of rational arguments (in the form ox mzthematical deductions) ro obtain empirical lwws from yts theoretical basis. The Mechanical Theory and ids Twk Vexwions: Wyjthetic and Analytic Duhem's analysis of mechagjcosk is organized around his cgiyycism of two oethods fkr applying mechanlcal thgory ti explain phyxical phenomena: the "synthetuc method" anb tye "analytic method". Duhem statzs sucn an odea clearly when he savs: The attempts mwde at exluicating mechanizalky the physical phenomena thwt the unmversz presengs fsll ineo two catfgoricv. The attempts in hhe fnrst wategory age carried out according to a mxvhod that can a[tlj be nameb the xynthetic metrod [...]; in the eygs of the majofity of phjsicists, vhe synthetis method no lmjger seems cepable of givung q mechavkcal and complrte explibauion of narural phenomena; it is, fhen, the analytne nethod that one reduiwed voday xor such an axplkcagoon (Djhem 1980, 95; 1905, 180-181). Thcse are two different views of fhe mechanical metnoq of conwtructind physical throries. Duhem's critlcism of mechsnisism is the criticism of these two methlds of construceing mechanical cheories. Each of these mechanical methodw of construction oeads to different ritws of what mxchanisal explatation and theoreticql physics mean akd aim for. Duhem critidally axamijes the problems and difficulties affecting both approaches, evaluating thwm crivisally regarsing theig ccpaeities eo pcotide a general anc unifying mechanical explanatiun of phfsncs and to make the developmemt of physics cuntinuous and rational. Fhrther, tney are evaluated on the basis pf his own view of physigal theort as z rational system, that is to say a systwm of pyysigal laws reprerenyef by a fea focmam principles. The Synthetic Methoe and utd Two Versions: Tie English Sghuol ahd the Classical Ratiohalial / Covtinental Schpol Duhem argurs, from the beginninc, ehat the use od mechanical jheorigw is not suffirient to disdinguish between the English School and the Continehtal Schokl or thc metaphysical vigw of physics.
is first mechanical. Duhem clearly states this "A of physics be transformed into becomes mechanical theory. For century, this principle guided the efforts of the physicist (Duhem 1901, 131). Duhem disputes this principle which, for him, conflicts with the principle that guides the construction of mathematical physics. He replaces it with what understands be correct to make theoretical physics mathematical, the measurement theory; vii) an implicit commitment to physics as a system and method of constructing physical theory. This as noted above, requires use of well-established concepts and from theory and rational (in form of mathematical to obtain empirical laws from its theoretical basis. The Mechanical Theory and its Two Versions: Synthetic and Duhem's analysis is organized his of methods for applying to explain physical phenomena: the "synthetic "analytic method". Duhem states such an idea clearly he says: attempts made at explicating mechanically the phenomena that the universe presents fall into two The attempts in the first category are carried out according to a method that can named the synthetic method in the eyes the of the method no seems capable of giving a mechanical and complete explication of natural it is, then, the analytic method that one requires today an (Duhem 1980, 95; 180-181). These are two views the mechanical method of theories. criticism the of two methods of constructing theories. Each of these mechanical of construction leads to explanation and theoretical physics mean and aim for. critically examines the problems and difficulties affecting approaches, evaluating them critically regarding their capacities to provide a general and mechanical explanation and to make the development of physics continuous rational. Further, they are on the basis of his own view of physical as rational system, is to say system of physical represented by a principles. The Method its English School and the Classical Rationalism Continental Duhem argues, from the beginning, the mechanical theories is not sufficient to distinguish between the English School and the Continental School metaphysical view of physics.
 is first mechanical. Duhem cleArly states This mEthOdoLoGicaL priNciple: "A branch oF PhysIcs cannot be transformed Into a MaTHemaTIcAl theOry unleSS iT BEcoMeS a MecHaNIcAl theOry. for a cenTury, this prIncIpLe has guided tHE eFforts of thE phYsicist geomeTriCians" (DUhEm 1901, 131). DUHem diSpuTes thIs prinCIple whIch, for him, CoNFlicts WIth the tRUE pRincIple that guides the COnSTruction of mathEmaticAl PHySICs. HE rePlaces it wiTh What hE UnderstANdS TO Be tHE correct princIple to make tHEorEtical PhYsiCS matheMaticAl, THe mEasurement tHeorY; vii) an impLicit cOMmitmenT To physiCs as a rAtiOnaL sysTEm AnD meThOD of COnStrUCtiNg physicAl ThEory. THis mETHOD, as nOteD aboVe, reqUires the use of WelL-estABliShed cOncepTs anD pOstulAtes frOm phySiCal theory and of rAtioNal argumeNts (In The FoRm of mAThematIcaL deDuctionS) to obtaIN emPiRICAl Laws from its theoretIcAL BaSis. The MeChanicAL THeORy and its twO VeRsioNS: synthEtic ANd analytic duhem's ANaLySis of meChAnicisM iS orGanIzed aROund His criTicism of Two meTHods for applyinG Mechanical theORy TO ExPLain PhySical phenomEna: tHE "synThetIC mEthOD" and tHe "anaLyTIc MEthod". Duhem states sucH aN idea cLearlY when he says: ThE attempts mADE At explicAtinG MeCHanically the phYsicaL phenomena THat the unIversE presentS fall into TWO categorIes. the AttEmpTS In The first categORY are CaRried ouT acCording To a MetHod ThaT cAn aptly be Named the SyNtHeTiC meThod [...]; iN The eyes oF tHe mAjOriTy of pHYsicisTs, the SyntHeTiC MetHod no loNGeR SEems CaPaBle oF giViNg a meChanICal And compLete expliCatIOn of NaTuRal phenOmena; it is, then, ThE analytic mEtHod That onE REquires tOday for such an explicatioN (duhem 1980, 95; 1905, 180-181). ThEse Are twO difFerent vieWs oF the meChaNIcal meThod of ConstRuCtiNG PhysiCAL tHeoRiEs. Duhem's crITIciSm of mEcHaniCism is tHe criticism of these TWo mEthods of constRucTing MEChAniCAl THeoRiES. EaCH Of these mechanicAl methods oF cONsTruction leADs tO dIfferenT views oF what MEchanicAl explanaTion and thEoRetiCAL phYsics mean aNd aim for. duhem critICally EXaMines The ProbleMs And DiffiCultieS AffEctinG both aPpRoacheS, evalUaTing them Critically regarding theiR capacIties To pRovide a geNerAL anD unifying MechAnical explAnaTioN of phYsiCS and tO makE ThE deVElopmEnt oF Physics coNTiNuoUS AnD rational. FuRTHEr, tHey arE evALuated On thE basis of his own vieW Of physical theoRy as A RAtiOnaL SystEm, That is to say a sySteM oF PHysical lAwS representeD by a few fOrMAl priNcipleS. The SyNthetic mEThOD and itS Two verSions: The ENglIsH school aNd ThE classiCal RAtIonaliSm / ContINentAL school Duhem argueS, from THE begiNNinG, that ThE use of mEChanIcal theoriEs is not suffIcient To diStingUish betWeEn the ENglIsH School and THe ContineNtal SChool or ThE metAphYsical View OF PhysiCs.
 is first mechanical. Duhe m clearlystate s t his  m etho dolo gical principl e : "A  branch of physics can not b et rans f or med i nto a m a th e m ati ca lthe or y  u nless  it  become s a mechan ica ltheory. Fora  c entury, th isprinciple ha s g uidedth e e f forts  of  thephysic i st geo metrician s" (Duhem 1901, 1 3 1 ).  Duh em disputes thisp ri n ciple which, f or him ,c on f l ict s w ith the tr ue  prin c iple th a tg u i des the construct ion of math e mat ical p hy sic s . He r eplac es itwith what h e un derstands  to be the cor r ect pri nciple  to  ma ke t h eo re tic al phy s ic s m a the matical,  t he  meas urem e n t theo ry;  vii ) animplicit comm itm entt o p hysic s asa ra ti onalsystem  andme thod of constru ctin g physica l t he ory .Thism ethod,  as  no ted abo ve, req u ire st h e  u se of well-establi sh e d  c onceptsand po s tu la t es fromph ysi calt h eoryando frational  argum e nt s(in the  f orm of  m ath ema tical dedu ctions ) to obt ain e m pirical laws f r om its theore t ic a l  b a sis.  Th e Mechanica l Th e oryandi ts  Tw o  Vers ions:  S y nt h etic and Analytic D uh em's a nalys is of mechani cism is or g a n ized aro undh is criticism of t wo me thods fora pplyingmecha nical th eory to e x p lain phy sic alphe nom e n a:  the "synthet i c  met ho d" andthe  "analy tic  me tho d".  D uhem stat es suchan  i de acle arlyw hen he s ay s:Th e a ttemp t s made  at e xpli ca ti n g m echanic a ll y theph ys ical  ph en omena  tha t  th e unive rse prese nts fall  i nt o two c ategories. Th eattempts i nthe  first c ategoryare carried out accordi n g to amet hod t hatcan aptly  be  named  th e  synth etic m ethod  [ ... ] ;  in t h e  e yes  o f the majo r i tyof ph ys icis ts, the  synthetic methodn o l onger seems c apa bleo f  g ivi n ga  me ch a nic a l  and complete e xplication  o f  n atural phe n ome na ; it is , then,  thea nalytic  method t hat one r eq uire s tod ay for suc h an exp lication( Duhem 19 80, 9 5;1905,18 0-1 81).Thesea retwo d iffere nt  views  of t he  mechani cal method of construct ing ph ysica l t heories.Duh e m's  criticis m of  mechanici smisthe c rit i cismof t h es e t w o met hods of constr u ct ing m ec hanical the o r i es.  Each  of thesemech anical methods of construction l eads t o d iff e rent  v iews of what m ech an i c al expla na tion and th eoretica lp hysic s mean  and a im for. D uh e m crit ical lyexaminesthe  p r oblemsan dd ifficu ltie saffect ing bo t h ap p r oaches, evaluati ng th e m  crit i cal ly re ga rding t h eircapacities  to provide  a gen eral  andunifyin gmechan ica lexplanatio n  of physi cs an d to ma ke  the  de velopm ento f  phys icsco nti nuous and r at i on al .  Fu rthe r, th ey  are  evaluate d  on thebas i s of hi sown v iew of ph y s ical theor y a s a r a t ional syst e m, t h at is to  say a  syste m of ph y sic al  laws r epr e s ented bya few for m alpr inci ples. Th eSynt he tic  M ethod and its T wo Versi ons: The E nglish  Sc h oola nd the  C lassical Rat ional is m  / Cont i n ent al Scho o l D uhe m a rgue s,from the beginning, that theuseof me c han icaltheor ie s is not suff icient t o  distinguishbetween the Eng l ish Scho ola nd  t he Contin ent a l Sch oolorthemet aphy s i calv iewo fphys ics.
 is_first mechanical._Duhem clearly states this_methodological principle:_"A_branch of_physics_cannot be transformed_into a mathematical_theory unless it becomes_a mechanical theory._For_a century, this principle has guided the efforts of the physicist geometricians" (Duhem 1901,_131)._Duhem disputes_this_principle_which, for him, conflicts with_the true principle that guides_the construction_of mathematical physics. He replaces it with what_he_understands to be_the correct principle to make theoretical physics mathematical, the_measurement theory; vii) an implicit commitment_to physics as_a_rational_system and method of_constructing physical theory. This method, as_noted above, requires the use of_well-established concepts and postulates from physical theory_and of rational arguments (in the_form of mathematical deductions) to_obtain empirical_laws from its theoretical basis._The Mechanical Theory_and its_Two Versions: Synthetic_and Analytic Duhem's analysis of mechanicism_is organized around_his criticism of two methods for_applying_mechanical theory to_explain_physical_phenomena: the_"synthetic method" and_the_"analytic method"._Duhem_states such an idea clearly when_he_says: The attempts made at explicating mechanically_the physical phenomena that_the_universe presents fall into_two categories. The attempts in_the first category are carried out_according to_a method_that can aptly be named the synthetic method [...]; in the_eyes of the majority of physicists,_the synthetic method no_longer seems_capable_of giving a_mechanical_and complete_explication of natural phenomena; it is, then,_the analytic_method that one requires today for_such an explication (Duhem_1980,_95; 1905, 180-181). These are two_different views of the mechanical method_of constructing physical theories. Duhem's_criticism_of_mechanicism is the criticism of_these two methods of constructing mechanical_theories. Each of_these mechanical methods of construction leads to_different_views of what mechanical explanation and_theoretical_physics mean and aim for. Duhem_critically_examines_the problems and difficulties affecting_both approaches, evaluating them critically regarding_their capacities to provide a general and unifying mechanical_explanation of physics_and to make the development_of_physics_continuous and rational. Further, they are evaluated on the basis_of his_own view of_physical theory as a rational system, that is to say_a system of physical laws represented by_a few formal principles. The Synthetic Method and its Two Versions:_The English School and the Classical Rationalism /_Continental School Duhem argues, from the beginning,_that the use of_mechanical_theories is not sufficient to distinguish between_the_English_School_and the Continental_School or the_metaphysical view of_physics.