David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 33 (1):35-57 (2002)
By the middle of the eighteenth century the new science had challenged the intellectual primacy of common experience in favor of recondite, expert and even counter-intuitive knowledge increasingly mediated by specialized instruments. Meanwhile modern philosophy had also problematized the perceptions of common experience - in the case of David Hume this included our perception of causal relations in nature, a fundamental precondition of scientific endeavor.In this article I argue that, in responding to the 'problem of induction' as advanced by Hume, Reid reformulated Aristotelian foundationalism in distinctly modern terms. An educator and mathematician self-consciously working within the framework of the new science, Reid articulated a philosophical foundation for natural knowledge anchored in the human constitution and in processes of adjudication in an emerging modern public sphere of enlightened discourse. Reid thereby transformed one of the bases of Aristotelian science - common experience - into a philosophically and socially justified notion of 'common sense'. Reid's intellectual concerns had as much to do with the philosophy of science as they did with moral philosophy or epistemology proper, and were bound up with wider social and scientific changes taking place in the early modern period.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Thomas Broman (1998). The Habermasian Public Sphere And. History of Science 36:123-150.
Stephen Buckle (1999). British Sceptical Realism: A Fresh Look at the British Tradition. European Journal of Philosophy 7 (1):1–29.
I. Halonen & J. Hintikka (2000). Aristotelian Explanations. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 31 (1):125-136.
Max Hocutt (1974). Aristotle's Four Becauses. Philosophy 49 (190):385 - 399.
Keith Lehrer (2000). Reid, God and Epistemology. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 74 (3):357-372.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Etienne Brun-Rovet (2002). Reid, Kant and the Philosophy of Mind. Philosophical Quarterly 52 (209):495-510.
Terence Cuneo & René van Woudenberg (eds.) (2004). The Cambridge Companion to Thomas Reid. Cambridge University Press.
Giovanni B. Grandi (2008). Reid on Ridicule and Common Sense. Journal of Scottish Philosophy 6 (1):71-90.
Thomas Reid (1997). Thomas Reid, an Inquiry Into the Human Mind: On the Principles of Common Sense. Pennsylvania State University Press.
Michael Pakaluk (2002). A Defence of Scottish Common Sense. Philosophical Quarterly 52 (209):564-581.
Barry Dainton (2008). Sensing Change. Philosophical Issues 18 (1):362-384.
P. D. Magnus (2008). Reid's Defense of Common Sense. Philosophers' Imprint 8 (3):1-14.
Brian Grant (2001). The Virtues of Common Sense. Philosophy 76 (2):191-209.
Erik Lundestad (2006). The Skeptic and The Madman: The Proto‐Pragmatism of Thomas Reid. Journal of Scottish Philosophy 4 (2):125-137.
Michael De Medeiros (2010). Common Sense. Weigl Publishers.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads71 ( #22,032 of 1,101,884 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #34,086 of 1,101,884 )
How can I increase my downloads?