Conservation and Innovation : Helmholtz's Struggle with Energy ...

elevant consequence of the deductions made (the great role that Helmholtz gives
to the principle of vis viva will appear evident in the first chapter of the
Erhaltung ).
Helmholtz in 1882 added some appendices to the reprint of the
Erhaltung; two of which are relevant for the present discussion of the
Introduction. In the first 91 he asserted he is now (1881-2) less Kantian than in
1847. But he also reasserted that the causality principle is nothing else than the
presupposition of the lawlikeness of natural phenomena and reasserted the
identification of cause, force and law. In my view, after the controversies with
the metaphysicians and his stress on the empirical aspects of geometry,
Helmholtz wanted to detach himself from a rigid interpretation of the validity
and reality of Kant's categories, while reasserting their use, in particular causality,
as presuppositions. That is, with the terminology adopted here: detach himself
from the interpretation of Newtonian forces as final causes but still adhere to the
regulative and transcendental use of causality 92. Also the other Appendix show
that, after the electrodynamic debate of the seventies, the Newtonian force model
was shaken. I rather believe that Helmholtz wanted to detach himself from the
Kantian model of Newtonian forces and instead stress the Kantian belief in the
transcendental causality as condition for the possibility of experience, a lasting
methodological tool for Helmholtz till the "Introduction to Theoretical lectures"
of 1894.
In the second Appendix 93 Helmholtz again tackled the problem raised by
his model of central forces and reasserted, against criticisms, some aspects of his
conceptual explanation: the discussions of chapter 1 and 2 of the Erhaltung can
still be considered "partially" valid only if it is accepted that forces can be
decomposed into point forces, and that the principle of superposition holds. But
this last assumption has to be explicitly admitted and cannot be considered any
longer a necessary consequence of the intelligibility of nature. Finally he
91 Helmholtz WA1 P.68.
92 Kahl Selected P. 49, Lindsay Applications P.27, Galaty "German Reductionism",
and Fullinwider "Influence" P.53 wrongly interpret "stärker..., als ich jetzt" as "strongly, as I
still" instead of "more strongly, than I now" as more correctly Heimann does: "Helmholtz and
Kant" P.219. But, while agreeing with Heimann that despite qualifications the appendix still
reveals a Kantian framing, I do not believe that it was meant to "provide a stronger
justificational foundation for the central forces principles". Ibid p.220.
93 Helmholtz WA1 Pp.68-70.