Vol.:(0123456789) Foundations of Chemistry (2022) 24:423–431 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-022-09435-w 1 3 Robert Boyle and the relational and dispositional nature of chemical properties Marina Paola Banchetti‑Robino 1 Accepted: 22 April 2022 / Published online: 3 June 2022 © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022 Abstract This paper establishes that Robert Boyle’s complex chemical ontology implies a non- reductionistic conception of chemical qualities and, more specifcally, a conception of chemical qualities as being dispositional and relational. Though Peter Anstey has already shown that that Boyle considered sensible qualities to be dispositional and relational, this moves beyond Anstey’s work by extending his arguments to chemical properties. These arguments are, however, merely a frst step in establishing a non-reductionistic interpreta- tion of Boyle’s chemical ontology. A further argument will show that Boyle regards chemi- cal and other higher-level properties as being emergent and supervenient properties. These arguments are supported by substantial textual evidence from Boyle’s writings, which show that he clearly conceived of chemical substances as functional wholes whose prop- erties emerge not only from the microstructural ordering of their parts but also from their relationship with other chemical substances within the context of experimental practice. Keywords Boyle · Corpuscularism · Mechanism · Chemical qualities · Dispositional properties · Relational properties · Reductionism · Emergentism Introduction Historians and philosophers of science have generally regarded Robert Boyle (1627–1691) as a key fgure and champion of seventeenth century Cartesian mechanical philosophy. This paper, however, establishes that Boyle’s complex chemical ontology implies a non- reductionistic conception of chemical qualities and, more specifcally, a conception of chemical qualities as being dispositional and relational. Though Peter Anstey has already shown that that Boyle considered sensible qualities to be dispositional and relational, this moves beyond Anstey’s work by extending his arguments to chemical properties. These arguments are, however, merely a frst step in establishing a non-reductionistic interpreta- tion of Boyle’s chemical ontology. A further argument will show that Boyle regards chemi- cal and other higher-level properties as being emergent and supervenient properties. These arguments are supported by substantial textual evidence from Boyle’s writings, which * Marina Paola Banchetti-Robino banchett@fau.edu 1 Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, USA