This manuscript, divided into two parts, provides a contextual and historiographical analysis of Edwin Arthur Burtt's classic The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science. My discussion corroborates the sparse technical literature on Burtt (Moriarty, 1994; Villemaire, 2002), positioning his work in the aftermath of American idealism and the rise of realist, pragmatist and naturalist alternatives. However, I depart from the existing interpretations both in content and focus. Disagreeing with Moriarty, I maintain that Burtt's Metaphysical Foundations is not an idealist work. Moreover, I provide an alternative to Villemaire's mainly Deweyite/pragmatist reading, emphasizing the import of new realism and naturalism. Burtt's historical thesis should not be viewed as outlining a systematic philosophical position, but rather as a (coherent) culmination of numerous philosophical problematics. To support my conclusion, I provide a substantial summary of Burtt's text alongside a contextual analysis of the philosophical issues that preoccupied his teachers and peers in Columbia's philosophy department. I conclude with a historiographical section, rendering explicit the connections between Burtt's understanding of the scientific revolution, and his distinctive early 20th century American intellectual context.

该手稿分为两个部分，提供了对爱德温·阿瑟·伯特（Edwin Arthur Burtt）的经典著作《现代物理科学的形而上学基础》的语境和历史学分析。我的讨论证实了有关伯特的稀疏技术文献（Moriarty，1994年； Villemaire，2002年），将他的工作定位于美国唯心主义和现实主义，实用主义和自然主义替代方案兴起的后果。但是，我在内容和重点上都偏离了现有的解释。我不同意莫里亚蒂，我认为伯特的形而上学基础不是理想主义者的作品。此外，我提供了替代维勒梅尔（Villemaire）主要是杜威（Deweyite）/实用主义的著作，强调了新现实主义和自然主义的引入。伯特的历史命题不应被视为概述系统的哲学立场，而应被视为众多哲学问题的（连贯的）最终结果。为了支持我的结论，我提供了Burtt文章的大量摘要，以及对哲学问题的上下文分析，这些分析使他的老师和同僚陷入了哥伦比亚哲学系。我以史学部分作为结尾，明确阐明了伯特对科学革命的理解与他20世纪初独特的美国知识分子之间的联系。