Newton's Methodology and Criticism of Mechanical Materialism

Roman Zavadil

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46938/tv.2020.461

Abstract


This article will introduce Isaac Newton’s fundamental methodological concepts applied for a solution concerning a question of gravity in his Principia Mathematica. The method of deduction of propositions from phenomena can be described as demonstrative induction. The main aim is to show that this method proposed by Newton explicitly contains a criticism of hypothetico-deductive methodology as an inadequate approach to the study of nature. As opposed to hypothetico-deductive method, demonstrative induction is capable of producing theories with much richer empirical and epistemological value. Delimitation against hypothetically deduced theories is closely connected with criticism of mechanical materialism, most notably in a form proposed by René Descartes. Consequently, it has led Newton to not only reject the universality of mechanical premise but also to certain level of immunization against all competitive hypothetically based theories.

Keywords


Newton; methodology; mechanical materialism; induction; hypothesis

Full Text:

PDF (Čeština)

References


Belkind, Ori. „Newton’s Scientific Method and the Law of Gravitation.“ In Interpreting Newton: Critical Essays, edited by Andrew Janiak and Eric Schliesser, 138–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511994845.009.

Cohen, I. Bernard. „Newton’s Concept of Force and Mass, With Notes on the Laws of Motion.“ In The Cambridge Companion to Newton, edited by Robert Iliffe and George E. Smith, 57–84. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521651778.003.

Copernicus, Nicolaus. „Commentariolus.“ In Three Copernican Treatises, edited by Edward Rosen, 55–90. New York: Octagon Books, 1971.

Cushing, James T. Philosophical Concepts in Physics: The Historical Relation Between Philosophy and Scientific Theories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139171106.

De Gandt, François. Force and Geometry in Newton’s Principia. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014.

Descartes, René. Principles of Philosophy. Translated by Valentine Rodger Miller and Reese P. Miller. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1984.

Dorling, John. „Demonstrative Induction: Its Significant Role in the History of Physics.“ Philosophy of Science 40, no. 3 (1973): 360–72. https://doi.org/10.1086/288537.

Ducheyne, Steffen. „Newton on Action at a Distance and the Cause of Gravity.“ Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 42, no. 1 (2011): 154–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2010.11.003.

Duhem, Pierre. The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory. Translated by Philip P. Wiener. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991.

Gaukroger, Stephen. Descartes’ System of Natural Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606229.

Guicciardini, Niccoló. Reading the Principia: The Debate on Newton’s Mathematical Methods for Natural Philosophy From 1687 to 1736. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511524752.

Hanson, Norwood R. „Hypotheses Fingo.“ In The Methodological Heritage of Newton, edited by Robert E. Butts and John W. Davis, 14–33. Oxford: Blackwell, 1970. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442632783-003.

Harper, William L. Isaac Newton’s Scientific Method: Turning Data Into Evidence About Gravity and Cosmology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199570409.001.0001.

Harper, William. „Newton’s Argument for Universal Gravitation.“ In The Cambridge Companion to Newton, edited by Robert Iliffe and George E. Smith, 229–60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCO9781139058568.007.

Henry, John. The Scientific Revolution and the Origins of Modern Science. New York: Palgrave, 2002.

Henry, John. „Gravity and de Gravitatione: Development of Newton’s Ideas on Action at a Distance.“ Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 42, no. 1 (2011): 11–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2010.11.025.

Henry, John. „Newton and Action at a Distance Between Bodies – a Response to Andrew Janiak’s ,Three Concepts of Causation in Newton.‘“ Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 47 (2014): 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2014.03.001.

Janiak, Andrew. Newton as Philosopher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511481512.

Kochiras, Hylarie. „Gravity and Newton’s Substance Counting Problem.“ Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 40, no. 3 (2009): 267–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2009.07.003.

Kochiras, Hylarie. „Gravity and Newton’s Substance Counting Problem: Contextualizing the Problem.“ Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 42, no. 1 (2011): 167–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2010.11.005.

Lerner, K. Lee, and Brenda Wilmoth Lerner. Scientific Thought: In Context. Gale: Cengage Learning, 2009.

Matthews, Michael R. Scientific Background to Modern Philosophy. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1989.

McGuire, J. E. „Boyle’s Conception of Nature.“ Journal of History of Ideas 33, no. 4 (1972): 523–42. https://doi.org/10.2307/2708855.

Newton Isaac. Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. Translated by I. Bernard Cohen and Anne Whitman. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999.

Newton, Isaac. „Isaac Newton to Robert Hooke, February 5, 1675/6.“ In The Correspondence of Isaac Newton, Vol. 1 1661–1675, edited by Herbert W. Turnbull, 416–25. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959.

Newton, Isaac. „Isaac Newton to Roger Cotes, March 31, 1713.“ In The Correspondence of Isaac Newton, Vol. 5, 1709–1713, edited by A. Rupert Hall and Laura Tilling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975.

Newton, Isaac. Philosophical Writings. Edited by Andrew Janiak. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Newton, Isaac. Unpublished Scientific Papers of Isaac Newton. Edited by A. Rupert Hall and Marie Boas Hall. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1962.

Norton, John D. „Eliminative Induction as a Method of Discovery: How Einstein Discovered General Relativity.“ In The Creation of Ideas in Physics, edited by Jarrett Leplin, 29–69. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0037-3_3.

Schliesser, Eric. „Newton’s Substance Monism, Distant Action, and the Nature of Newton’s Empiricism: Discussion of H. Kochiras ,Gravity and Newton’s Substance Counting Problem.‘“ Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 42, no. 1 (2011): 160–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2010.11.004.

Smith, George E. „The Methodology of the Principia.“ In The Cambridge Companion to Newton, edited by Robert Iliffe and George E. Smith, 187–228. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCO9781139058568.006.

Torretti, Roberto. The Philosophy of Physics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.




Copyright (c) 2020 Roman Zavadil

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

TEORIE VĚDY / THEORY OF SCIENCE – journal for interdisciplinary studies of science is published twice a year by the Institute of Philosophy of the Czech Academy of Sciences (Centre for Science, Technology, and Society Studies). ISSN 1210-0250 (Print) ISSN 1804-6347 (Online) MK ČR E 18677 web: http://teorievedy.flu.cas.cz /// email: teorievedy@flu.cas.cz