Switch to: References

Citations of:

The fate of the date: The theology of Newton's principia revised

In Margaret J. Osler (ed.), Rethinking the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge University Press. pp. 271--96 (2000)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Newton’s De gravitatione: a review and reassessment.J. A. Ruffner - 2012 - Archive for History of Exact Sciences 66 (3):241-264.
    The widely accepted supposition that Newton’s De gravitatione was written in 1684/5 just before composing the Principia is examined. The basis for this determination has serious difficulties starting with the failure to examine the numerical estimates for the resistance of aether. The estimated range is not nearly nil as claimed but comparable with air at or near the earth’s surface. Moreover, the evidence provided most likely stems from experiments by Boyle, Hooke, and others in the 1660s and does not use (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Newton’s Neo-Platonic Ontology of Space.Edward Slowik - 2013 - Foundations of Science 18 (3):419-448.
    This paper investigates Newton’s ontology of space in order to determine its commitment, if any, to both Cambridge neo-Platonism, which posits an incorporeal basis for space, and substantivalism, which regards space as a form of substance or entity. A non-substantivalist interpretation of Newton’s theory has been famously championed by Howard Stein and Robert DiSalle, among others, while both Stein and the early work of J. E. McGuire have downplayed the influence of Cambridge neo-Platonism on various aspects of Newton’s own spatial (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Isaac Newton on Space and Time: Metaphysician or Not?Steffen Ducheyne - 2001 - Philosophica 67 (1).
  • Newton and Proclus: Geometry, imagination, and knowing space.Mary Domski - 2012 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (3):389-413.
    I aim to clarify the argument for space that Newton presents in De Gravitatione (composed prior to 1687) by putting Newton's remarks into conversation with the account of geometrical knowledge found in Proclus's Commentary on the First Book of Euclid's Elements (ca. 450). What I highlight is that both Newton and Proclus adopt an epistemic progression (or “order of knowing”) according to which geometrical knowledge necessarily precedes our knowledge of metaphysical truths concerning the ontological state of affairs. As I argue, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations