Stephen Gaukroger
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- January 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199296446
- eISBN:
- 9780191711985
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199296446.003.0009
- Subject:
- Philosophy, History of Philosophy
From the early 17th century onwards, the dominant natural philosophy was mechanism: the view that all explanations must ultimately take the form of a reduction to a very economical range of features ...
More
From the early 17th century onwards, the dominant natural philosophy was mechanism: the view that all explanations must ultimately take the form of a reduction to a very economical range of features at the micro-corpuscularian level, e.g., in the paradigm case, size, speed, and direction of motion. Gassendi and Beeckman offered very different routes to mechanism: Gassendi's was a legitimatory programme that focuses on matter theory, whereas Beeckman's approach comes directly out of mechanics, which it attempted to transform into natural philosophy by fleshing it out in micro-corpuscularian terms. The crucial stage in mechanism comes with the rise of concerted attempts to integrate mechanics and matter theory into a consistent whole, at the same time offering the mechanism so devised as a complete theory of the cosmos, and it is the approaches of Hobbes, whose closest affinities are with Gassendi, and Descartes, whose closest affinities are with Beeckman, that bring out most clearly what is at issue here.Less
From the early 17th century onwards, the dominant natural philosophy was mechanism: the view that all explanations must ultimately take the form of a reduction to a very economical range of features at the micro-corpuscularian level, e.g., in the paradigm case, size, speed, and direction of motion. Gassendi and Beeckman offered very different routes to mechanism: Gassendi's was a legitimatory programme that focuses on matter theory, whereas Beeckman's approach comes directly out of mechanics, which it attempted to transform into natural philosophy by fleshing it out in micro-corpuscularian terms. The crucial stage in mechanism comes with the rise of concerted attempts to integrate mechanics and matter theory into a consistent whole, at the same time offering the mechanism so devised as a complete theory of the cosmos, and it is the approaches of Hobbes, whose closest affinities are with Gassendi, and Descartes, whose closest affinities are with Beeckman, that bring out most clearly what is at issue here.
Stephen Gaukroger
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- January 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199296446
- eISBN:
- 9780191711985
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199296446.003.0011
- Subject:
- Philosophy, History of Philosophy
This chapter deals with experimental philosophy, as represented in Gilbert on magnetism, Hobbes on the air pump, and Newton on the production of the spectrum. It is shown that experimental philosophy ...
More
This chapter deals with experimental philosophy, as represented in Gilbert on magnetism, Hobbes on the air pump, and Newton on the production of the spectrum. It is shown that experimental philosophy differs from mechanism in quite radical ways. In particular, it has explanatory success but in apparently very localized domains, and it construes causation not in terms of underlying causes but in terms of causes acting at the same level. Its difference from mechanism is manifest in the contrast between Descartes' and Newton's accounts of the production of the spectrum: Descartes provides a fully geometrical account of the separation of coloured rays, but then shifts into a different register, a qualitative and speculative one in attempting to provide a micro-corpuscularian account of the physical basis of colour production; Newton manages to account for the spectrum without leaving the phenomenal geometricized level, eschewing any recourse to ‘underlying’ causes.Less
This chapter deals with experimental philosophy, as represented in Gilbert on magnetism, Hobbes on the air pump, and Newton on the production of the spectrum. It is shown that experimental philosophy differs from mechanism in quite radical ways. In particular, it has explanatory success but in apparently very localized domains, and it construes causation not in terms of underlying causes but in terms of causes acting at the same level. Its difference from mechanism is manifest in the contrast between Descartes' and Newton's accounts of the production of the spectrum: Descartes provides a fully geometrical account of the separation of coloured rays, but then shifts into a different register, a qualitative and speculative one in attempting to provide a micro-corpuscularian account of the physical basis of colour production; Newton manages to account for the spectrum without leaving the phenomenal geometricized level, eschewing any recourse to ‘underlying’ causes.
Stephen Gaukroger
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- January 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199296446
- eISBN:
- 9780191711985
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199296446.003.0012
- Subject:
- Philosophy, History of Philosophy
This chapter looks at attempts to quantify natural phenomena and, in particular, forces. Early efforts along these lines — notably by Galileo and Descartes — tried to extrapolate from statics to ...
More
This chapter looks at attempts to quantify natural phenomena and, in particular, forces. Early efforts along these lines — notably by Galileo and Descartes — tried to extrapolate from statics to dynamics, whereas later in the century kinematics, as pioneered by Galileo, was taken as the model by Huygens and Newton. Newton, building on Hooke's suggestion that planetary orbits were not a given and unquestionable feature of the cosmos, was able to show how such orbits were generated and clarify the dynamics needed to account for the processes involved. In this way, mechanics, traditionally excluded from natural philosophy in the Aristotelian sense, is transformed not only into a natural-philosophical discipline, but into what was in many respects the natural-philosophical discipline par excellence.Less
This chapter looks at attempts to quantify natural phenomena and, in particular, forces. Early efforts along these lines — notably by Galileo and Descartes — tried to extrapolate from statics to dynamics, whereas later in the century kinematics, as pioneered by Galileo, was taken as the model by Huygens and Newton. Newton, building on Hooke's suggestion that planetary orbits were not a given and unquestionable feature of the cosmos, was able to show how such orbits were generated and clarify the dynamics needed to account for the processes involved. In this way, mechanics, traditionally excluded from natural philosophy in the Aristotelian sense, is transformed not only into a natural-philosophical discipline, but into what was in many respects the natural-philosophical discipline par excellence.
Stephen Gaukroger
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- January 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199296446
- eISBN:
- 9780191711985
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199296446.003.0007
- Subject:
- Philosophy, History of Philosophy
The development of the persona of the natural philosopher is the key to understanding how natural philosophy becomes inserted into European culture in the 16th and 17th centuries. This chapter shows ...
More
The development of the persona of the natural philosopher is the key to understanding how natural philosophy becomes inserted into European culture in the 16th and 17th centuries. This chapter shows in detail that notions of truth and justification turn just as much on conceptions of intellectual honesty as they do on notions of method. It looks primarily at the standing of the natural philosopher in Bacon, Galileo, Descartes, Boyle, and Royal Society apologists, focusing on claims that the natural philosopher requires a kind of intellectual honesty lacking in scholastic natural philosophy. This is closely tied in with one of the distinctive features of early-modern natural philosophy: that questions that had earlier been seen in terms of truth are now discussed instead in terms of impartiality and objectivity.Less
The development of the persona of the natural philosopher is the key to understanding how natural philosophy becomes inserted into European culture in the 16th and 17th centuries. This chapter shows in detail that notions of truth and justification turn just as much on conceptions of intellectual honesty as they do on notions of method. It looks primarily at the standing of the natural philosopher in Bacon, Galileo, Descartes, Boyle, and Royal Society apologists, focusing on claims that the natural philosopher requires a kind of intellectual honesty lacking in scholastic natural philosophy. This is closely tied in with one of the distinctive features of early-modern natural philosophy: that questions that had earlier been seen in terms of truth are now discussed instead in terms of impartiality and objectivity.
Victor J. Katz and Karen Hunger Parshall
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- October 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780691149059
- eISBN:
- 9781400850525
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Princeton University Press
- DOI:
- 10.23943/princeton/9780691149059.003.0010
- Subject:
- Mathematics, History of Mathematics
This chapter follows up on the mathematical advances made during the sixteenth century, especially in the work of François Viète as he aspired to transform his algebra to realize his aim to “solve ...
More
This chapter follows up on the mathematical advances made during the sixteenth century, especially in the work of François Viète as he aspired to transform his algebra to realize his aim to “solve every problem.” Though Viète's algebra was not up to the task, two of his followers—Thomas Harriot and Pierre de Fermat—helped to transform that algebra into the problem-solving tool he had envisioned, and René Descartes would later recognize the significance of this work and begin circulating these ideas, thus jumpstarting the transformation of algebra, which this chapter explores through a number of noted intellectuals during the period.Less
This chapter follows up on the mathematical advances made during the sixteenth century, especially in the work of François Viète as he aspired to transform his algebra to realize his aim to “solve every problem.” Though Viète's algebra was not up to the task, two of his followers—Thomas Harriot and Pierre de Fermat—helped to transform that algebra into the problem-solving tool he had envisioned, and René Descartes would later recognize the significance of this work and begin circulating these ideas, thus jumpstarting the transformation of algebra, which this chapter explores through a number of noted intellectuals during the period.
Randal Rauser
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- February 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199214600
- eISBN:
- 9780191706509
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199214600.003.0002
- Subject:
- Religion, Theology
The medieval consensus of Christendom that once framed theological discussion and yielded authority to the theologian was crucially eroded during the Reformation and Enlightenment. As a result, ...
More
The medieval consensus of Christendom that once framed theological discussion and yielded authority to the theologian was crucially eroded during the Reformation and Enlightenment. As a result, Christian philosophers like René Descartes, John Locke, and Immanuel Kant sought to secure the theologian's waning authority philosophically. Descartes sought to further the extent of medieval scientia through the radical method of critical doubt. Locke was more pessimistic about the potential of scientia, and so he focused instead upon the rational regulation of opinion. But Kant was the most pessimistic of all as he severely chastened reason in order to provide room for faith in practical reason. While each philosopher sought to provide a rational ground for theology, in retrospect they actually functioned like gravediggers that sped the decline of theology.Less
The medieval consensus of Christendom that once framed theological discussion and yielded authority to the theologian was crucially eroded during the Reformation and Enlightenment. As a result, Christian philosophers like René Descartes, John Locke, and Immanuel Kant sought to secure the theologian's waning authority philosophically. Descartes sought to further the extent of medieval scientia through the radical method of critical doubt. Locke was more pessimistic about the potential of scientia, and so he focused instead upon the rational regulation of opinion. But Kant was the most pessimistic of all as he severely chastened reason in order to provide room for faith in practical reason. While each philosopher sought to provide a rational ground for theology, in retrospect they actually functioned like gravediggers that sped the decline of theology.
C. U. M. Smith, Eugenio Frixione, Stanley Finger, and William Clower
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199766499
- eISBN:
- 9780199950263
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199766499.003.0006
- Subject:
- Neuroscience, History of Neuroscience
This chapter discusses René Descartes, who is an essential historical figure. It studies his highly influential work, where he tried to show how human neurophysiology and behavior could be entirely ...
More
This chapter discusses René Descartes, who is an essential historical figure. It studies his highly influential work, where he tried to show how human neurophysiology and behavior could be entirely explained using mechanistic terms. It shows that Descartes' neurophysiology imagined that the body's musculature would be activated by “animal spirits” that course down tubular nerves. It determines that his ideas were more related to metaphysics than with physiological and anatomical reality. This chapter also states that Descartes was the first to make all nature inanimate.Less
This chapter discusses René Descartes, who is an essential historical figure. It studies his highly influential work, where he tried to show how human neurophysiology and behavior could be entirely explained using mechanistic terms. It shows that Descartes' neurophysiology imagined that the body's musculature would be activated by “animal spirits” that course down tubular nerves. It determines that his ideas were more related to metaphysics than with physiological and anatomical reality. This chapter also states that Descartes was the first to make all nature inanimate.
Ayesha Ramachandran
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- May 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780226288796
- eISBN:
- 9780226288826
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226288826.003.0005
- Subject:
- History, History of Ideas
By the seventeenth century, the terms “world” and “cosmos” would become almost interchangeable: chapter four explores this further expansion in scale in René Descartes’s Le monde (The World) whose ...
More
By the seventeenth century, the terms “world” and “cosmos” would become almost interchangeable: chapter four explores this further expansion in scale in René Descartes’s Le monde (The World) whose title refers, in fact, to the universe. Though celebrated for his invention of the cogito, this chapter argues for Descartes’s significance as a revolutionary worldmaker: Le monde imagines the creation of a hypothetical world (a “new world”) in order to establish a new physics. Descartes’s suppression of the text after Galileo’s condemnation in 1632 is thus motivated by the recognition of the dangerous consequences of worldmaking itself. Confronting the necessity of human making, he seeks, in the Meditations, to defend its foundations by realigning the metaphysical relation between God and world. Descartes’s work thus marks the transition from Mercator’s bodily and artisanal metaphors of worldmaking to an internalization of the world as a product of the “intellectual imagination.”Less
By the seventeenth century, the terms “world” and “cosmos” would become almost interchangeable: chapter four explores this further expansion in scale in René Descartes’s Le monde (The World) whose title refers, in fact, to the universe. Though celebrated for his invention of the cogito, this chapter argues for Descartes’s significance as a revolutionary worldmaker: Le monde imagines the creation of a hypothetical world (a “new world”) in order to establish a new physics. Descartes’s suppression of the text after Galileo’s condemnation in 1632 is thus motivated by the recognition of the dangerous consequences of worldmaking itself. Confronting the necessity of human making, he seeks, in the Meditations, to defend its foundations by realigning the metaphysical relation between God and world. Descartes’s work thus marks the transition from Mercator’s bodily and artisanal metaphors of worldmaking to an internalization of the world as a product of the “intellectual imagination.”
Douglas John Casson
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- October 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780691144740
- eISBN:
- 9781400836888
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Princeton University Press
- DOI:
- 10.23943/princeton/9780691144740.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
This chapter describes how the crisis of authority led some to abandon the possibility of public justification altogether and others to seek out a type of knowledge that would be invulnerable to ...
More
This chapter describes how the crisis of authority led some to abandon the possibility of public justification altogether and others to seek out a type of knowledge that would be invulnerable to skeptical objections. Michel Montaigne and his popularizer, Pierre Charron, argued that in the absence of universally acceptable standards, wise men should defer to established traditions and reigning authorities. In contrast, René Descartes sought to resolve the problem of multiple authorities by erecting a new, apodictic science built on unassailable foundations. Although he hoped that his project would eventually yield absolute certainty in the contested realms of morals, politics, and religion, Descartes nonetheless counseled his readers to follow the customs and laws of their localities until such certainty could be achieved.Less
This chapter describes how the crisis of authority led some to abandon the possibility of public justification altogether and others to seek out a type of knowledge that would be invulnerable to skeptical objections. Michel Montaigne and his popularizer, Pierre Charron, argued that in the absence of universally acceptable standards, wise men should defer to established traditions and reigning authorities. In contrast, René Descartes sought to resolve the problem of multiple authorities by erecting a new, apodictic science built on unassailable foundations. Although he hoped that his project would eventually yield absolute certainty in the contested realms of morals, politics, and religion, Descartes nonetheless counseled his readers to follow the customs and laws of their localities until such certainty could be achieved.
Tad M. Schmaltz
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- January 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199659593
- eISBN:
- 9780191745218
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199659593.003.0011
- Subject:
- Philosophy, History of Philosophy
This chapter is a critical review of two recently published works on Descartes: Helen Hattab’s Descartes on Forms and Mechanisms and Peter Machamer and J.E. McGuire’s Descartes’s Changing Mind. Both ...
More
This chapter is a critical review of two recently published works on Descartes: Helen Hattab’s Descartes on Forms and Mechanisms and Peter Machamer and J.E. McGuire’s Descartes’s Changing Mind. Both works reflect the recent trend in Descartes scholarship to focus on Descartes’s writings on natural philosophy and to emphasize developments in these writings over time. The discussion of Hattab considers her central claim that whereas in his earlier writings Descartes offered an argument against the material substantial forms of the scholastics that is grounded in his mechanics, during the 1640s he settled instead on a metaphysical argument against such forms that reflects the influence of the Dutch atomist Gorlaeus. The discussion of Machacher and McGuire considers their central claim that Descartes’s account both of causation in the physical world and of the epistemic status of our claims about this world underwent a radical shift around the time of the Meditations.Less
This chapter is a critical review of two recently published works on Descartes: Helen Hattab’s Descartes on Forms and Mechanisms and Peter Machamer and J.E. McGuire’s Descartes’s Changing Mind. Both works reflect the recent trend in Descartes scholarship to focus on Descartes’s writings on natural philosophy and to emphasize developments in these writings over time. The discussion of Hattab considers her central claim that whereas in his earlier writings Descartes offered an argument against the material substantial forms of the scholastics that is grounded in his mechanics, during the 1640s he settled instead on a metaphysical argument against such forms that reflects the influence of the Dutch atomist Gorlaeus. The discussion of Machacher and McGuire considers their central claim that Descartes’s account both of causation in the physical world and of the epistemic status of our claims about this world underwent a radical shift around the time of the Meditations.
Roger Ariew
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- May 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199583645
- eISBN:
- 9780191738456
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199583645.003.0003
- Subject:
- Philosophy, History of Philosophy, Philosophy of Religion
This essay explores the reception and used of Suárez’s philosophy by two canonical early modern philosophers, René Descartes and Gottfried Leibniz. It is argued that Descartes’ theory of distinctions ...
More
This essay explores the reception and used of Suárez’s philosophy by two canonical early modern philosophers, René Descartes and Gottfried Leibniz. It is argued that Descartes’ theory of distinctions does not betray any indications of being Suárezian, despite many claims to the contrary. Leibniz, however, was a very different reader of Suárez’s works, it is argued, and his thinking about individuation was clearly influenced by Suárez even if he did not adopt the Suárezian position in the endLess
This essay explores the reception and used of Suárez’s philosophy by two canonical early modern philosophers, René Descartes and Gottfried Leibniz. It is argued that Descartes’ theory of distinctions does not betray any indications of being Suárezian, despite many claims to the contrary. Leibniz, however, was a very different reader of Suárez’s works, it is argued, and his thinking about individuation was clearly influenced by Suárez even if he did not adopt the Suárezian position in the end
Vlad Alexandrescu
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- January 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199659593
- eISBN:
- 9780191745218
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199659593.003.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, History of Philosophy
This chapter looks at Elisabeth’s arguments in the framework of Descartes’ program to collect valuable objections from members of the Republic of Letters. The analysis of Elisabeth’s first letters ...
More
This chapter looks at Elisabeth’s arguments in the framework of Descartes’ program to collect valuable objections from members of the Republic of Letters. The analysis of Elisabeth’s first letters reveals astonishing resemblances between Elisabeth’s position and the one Gassendi had expressed in his Fifth Objections. In order to explain this fact, the chapter proposes that Samuel Sorbière, present in the Low Countries since 1642, was an agent of Gassendi’s who worked his way into Queen of Bohemia’s court at the Hague and who, during several encounters with Princess Elisabeth, explained to her Gassendi’s views and worked with her on a Gassendist interpretation of Meditation Six. The chapter also shows that later on, Sorbière was to depart from a number of Gassendist positions and that Descartes’ ideas eventually permeated his philosophical writings.Less
This chapter looks at Elisabeth’s arguments in the framework of Descartes’ program to collect valuable objections from members of the Republic of Letters. The analysis of Elisabeth’s first letters reveals astonishing resemblances between Elisabeth’s position and the one Gassendi had expressed in his Fifth Objections. In order to explain this fact, the chapter proposes that Samuel Sorbière, present in the Low Countries since 1642, was an agent of Gassendi’s who worked his way into Queen of Bohemia’s court at the Hague and who, during several encounters with Princess Elisabeth, explained to her Gassendi’s views and worked with her on a Gassendist interpretation of Meditation Six. The chapter also shows that later on, Sorbière was to depart from a number of Gassendist positions and that Descartes’ ideas eventually permeated his philosophical writings.
Lisa Shapiro
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- February 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780226204413
- eISBN:
- 9780226204444
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226204444.003.0001
- Subject:
- Literature, Women's Literature
The correspondence between Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia (1618–80) and René Descartes covers topics spanning the range of philosophical inquiry, but the letters were not written for the public. Early ...
More
The correspondence between Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia (1618–80) and René Descartes covers topics spanning the range of philosophical inquiry, but the letters were not written for the public. Early on in the correspondence, Elisabeth is quite insistent that their exchanges be kept private. In concluding her letter of 6 May 1643, she charges Descartes to refrain from making their exchange public, and her letter of 10 October 1646 demonstrates that they considered communicating in code. This introductory chapter presents biographies of Princess Elizabeth and René Descartes. It then provides an overview of the philosophical issues engaged in the correspondence, along with some essential background for understanding those issues. Next, it considers in greater depth Elisabeth's own philosophical position.Less
The correspondence between Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia (1618–80) and René Descartes covers topics spanning the range of philosophical inquiry, but the letters were not written for the public. Early on in the correspondence, Elisabeth is quite insistent that their exchanges be kept private. In concluding her letter of 6 May 1643, she charges Descartes to refrain from making their exchange public, and her letter of 10 October 1646 demonstrates that they considered communicating in code. This introductory chapter presents biographies of Princess Elizabeth and René Descartes. It then provides an overview of the philosophical issues engaged in the correspondence, along with some essential background for understanding those issues. Next, it considers in greater depth Elisabeth's own philosophical position.
Maurice A. Finocchiaro
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- March 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780520242616
- eISBN:
- 9780520941373
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of California Press
- DOI:
- 10.1525/california/9780520242616.003.0004
- Subject:
- History, History of Science, Technology, and Medicine
This chapter begins with the period from 1633 to approximately 1642—the period of Galileo's life after the trial. It concentrates on the reactions of four individuals that for various reasons have ...
More
This chapter begins with the period from 1633 to approximately 1642—the period of Galileo's life after the trial. It concentrates on the reactions of four individuals that for various reasons have emblematic significance: Galileo, Nicholas Claude Fabri de Peiresc, Sister Maria Celeste, and René Descartes. Descartes claimed that the Inquisition had declared the geokinetic opinion a heresy. He was also probably echoing the Liège poster's interpretation. At the age of sixteen, Virginia became a nun in the monastery of San Matteo in Arcetri, on the outskirts of Florence, and took the name of Sister Maria Celeste. Peiresc was in a good position to try to help Galileo. Galileo concluded that, despite the identity of the formal conditions, he was actually freer to receive visitors in Arcetri.Less
This chapter begins with the period from 1633 to approximately 1642—the period of Galileo's life after the trial. It concentrates on the reactions of four individuals that for various reasons have emblematic significance: Galileo, Nicholas Claude Fabri de Peiresc, Sister Maria Celeste, and René Descartes. Descartes claimed that the Inquisition had declared the geokinetic opinion a heresy. He was also probably echoing the Liège poster's interpretation. At the age of sixteen, Virginia became a nun in the monastery of San Matteo in Arcetri, on the outskirts of Florence, and took the name of Sister Maria Celeste. Peiresc was in a good position to try to help Galileo. Galileo concluded that, despite the identity of the formal conditions, he was actually freer to receive visitors in Arcetri.
Tamar Szabó Gendler
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199589760
- eISBN:
- 9780191595486
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199589760.003.0015
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Metaphysics/Epistemology, Philosophy of Science
This chapter discusses the notion of alief: an innate or habitual propensity to respond to an apparent stimulus in a particular way. Recognizing the role that alief plays in our cognitive repertoire ...
More
This chapter discusses the notion of alief: an innate or habitual propensity to respond to an apparent stimulus in a particular way. Recognizing the role that alief plays in our cognitive repertoire provides a framework for understanding reactions that are governed by non‐conscious or automatic mechanisms, which in turn brings into proper relief the role played by reactions that are subject to conscious regulation and deliberate control. It also brings out the connection between a number of otherwise apparently discrepant issues—including fictional emotions, heuristics‐based errors, and residual racism—and renders unmysterious a number of otherwise perplexing phenomena, for example, certain superstitions. By directing philosophical attention to responses that are governed by habit and instinct, it encourages a new appreciation of a number of important insights from the ancient (Aristotle) and early modern traditions (René Descartes and David Hume), particularly those related to self‐regulation and morality.Less
This chapter discusses the notion of alief: an innate or habitual propensity to respond to an apparent stimulus in a particular way. Recognizing the role that alief plays in our cognitive repertoire provides a framework for understanding reactions that are governed by non‐conscious or automatic mechanisms, which in turn brings into proper relief the role played by reactions that are subject to conscious regulation and deliberate control. It also brings out the connection between a number of otherwise apparently discrepant issues—including fictional emotions, heuristics‐based errors, and residual racism—and renders unmysterious a number of otherwise perplexing phenomena, for example, certain superstitions. By directing philosophical attention to responses that are governed by habit and instinct, it encourages a new appreciation of a number of important insights from the ancient (Aristotle) and early modern traditions (René Descartes and David Hume), particularly those related to self‐regulation and morality.
Stephen Gaukroger
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199594931
- eISBN:
- 9780191595745
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199594931.003.0003
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Science, General
It was around Newton's Principia that most of the issues in eighteenth‐century natural philosophy hinged. The chapter explores the differences between the prevailing cosmological system, that of ...
More
It was around Newton's Principia that most of the issues in eighteenth‐century natural philosophy hinged. The chapter explores the differences between the prevailing cosmological system, that of Descartes, and that of Newton. It offers an exposition of the three books of the Principia, with a view to identifying what Newton's successors took up and what they rejected. Newton's problems with the physics of fluids and with gravity are explored.Less
It was around Newton's Principia that most of the issues in eighteenth‐century natural philosophy hinged. The chapter explores the differences between the prevailing cosmological system, that of Descartes, and that of Newton. It offers an exposition of the three books of the Principia, with a view to identifying what Newton's successors took up and what they rejected. Newton's problems with the physics of fluids and with gravity are explored.
Shankar Raman
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780719085536
- eISBN:
- 9781781707173
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Manchester University Press
- DOI:
- 10.7228/manchester/9780719085536.003.0011
- Subject:
- Literature, 16th-century and Renaissance Literature
Shankar Raman’s essay argues that the very idea of creative invention—so central to modern assumptions about literary authorship—is embedded in philosophical and mathematical ideas and practices of ...
More
Shankar Raman’s essay argues that the very idea of creative invention—so central to modern assumptions about literary authorship—is embedded in philosophical and mathematical ideas and practices of making. By focusing on the “matter” of key geometrical texts, from Euclid to Descartes, Shankar Raman finds evidence of a radical change in the imagined purpose of geometric training, which he relates to new ways of thinking about poetic production. The descriptions and non-linguistic representations of algebraic and geometric problems found in Descartes’ project becomes analogous, in ways Philip Sidney’s Defence of Poetry seems almost to anticipate, to the poet’s struggle to make rather than to imitate.Less
Shankar Raman’s essay argues that the very idea of creative invention—so central to modern assumptions about literary authorship—is embedded in philosophical and mathematical ideas and practices of making. By focusing on the “matter” of key geometrical texts, from Euclid to Descartes, Shankar Raman finds evidence of a radical change in the imagined purpose of geometric training, which he relates to new ways of thinking about poetic production. The descriptions and non-linguistic representations of algebraic and geometric problems found in Descartes’ project becomes analogous, in ways Philip Sidney’s Defence of Poetry seems almost to anticipate, to the poet’s struggle to make rather than to imitate.
Lisa Shapiro
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- February 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780226204413
- eISBN:
- 9780226204444
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226204444.003.0004
- Subject:
- Literature, Women's Literature
This chapter presents the English translation of the correspondence between Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia and René Descartes.
This chapter presents the English translation of the correspondence between Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia and René Descartes.
Niccolò Guicciardini
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- August 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780262013178
- eISBN:
- 9780262258869
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262013178.003.0003
- Subject:
- History, History of Science, Technology, and Medicine
This chapter explores René Descartes’ most influential mathematical work—the Géométrie (1637)—an essay that remained to be influential across generations, and which also had a profound impact in the ...
More
This chapter explores René Descartes’ most influential mathematical work—the Géométrie (1637)—an essay that remained to be influential across generations, and which also had a profound impact in the young Isaac Newton. Most of Newton’s mathematical work can be construed as his formal response to the Géométrie. The chapter then outlines the contributions of the Géométrie in the field of mathematics, particularly in geometry.Less
This chapter explores René Descartes’ most influential mathematical work—the Géométrie (1637)—an essay that remained to be influential across generations, and which also had a profound impact in the young Isaac Newton. Most of Newton’s mathematical work can be construed as his formal response to the Géométrie. The chapter then outlines the contributions of the Géométrie in the field of mathematics, particularly in geometry.
Dennis Des Chene
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- May 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199583645
- eISBN:
- 9780191738456
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199583645.003.0006
- Subject:
- Philosophy, History of Philosophy, Philosophy of Religion
This essay explores Suárez’s commitment to the important causal principle of propinquity or spatial contiguity. Like many, Suárez accepted the principle of no action at a distance. It is argued that ...
More
This essay explores Suárez’s commitment to the important causal principle of propinquity or spatial contiguity. Like many, Suárez accepted the principle of no action at a distance. It is argued that this commitment can be retained even though Suárez fundamentally altered the conception of efficient causality because this principle is independent of causality’s nature. Central to understanding Suárez’s commitment to the principle of propinquity is his account of the medium. Furthermore, the contrast between Suárez’s and René Descartes’ accounts of the causal medium are historically significant for understanding the rise of mechanical philosophy during the seventeenth century.Less
This essay explores Suárez’s commitment to the important causal principle of propinquity or spatial contiguity. Like many, Suárez accepted the principle of no action at a distance. It is argued that this commitment can be retained even though Suárez fundamentally altered the conception of efficient causality because this principle is independent of causality’s nature. Central to understanding Suárez’s commitment to the principle of propinquity is his account of the medium. Furthermore, the contrast between Suárez’s and René Descartes’ accounts of the causal medium are historically significant for understanding the rise of mechanical philosophy during the seventeenth century.
