The Newtonian Myth

Abstract
I examine Popper’s claims about Newton’s use of induction in Principia with the actual contents of Principia and draw two conclusions. Firstly, in common with most other philosophers of his generation, it appears that Popper had very little acquaintance with the contents and methodological complexities of Principia beyond what was in the famous General Scholium. Secondly Popper’s ideas about induction were less sophisticated than those of Newton, who recognised that it did not provide logical proofs of the results obtained using it, because of the possibilities of later, contrary evidence. I also trace the historical background to commonplace misconceptions about Newton’s method.Author Keywords: Newton; Popper; Induction; Principia; Kepler’s laws
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 14,216
External links
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
William Harper (2002). Newton's Argument for Universal Gravitation. In I. Bernard Cohen & George E. Smith (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Newton. Cambridge University Press 174--201.
Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Jessica Wilson (2007). Newtonian Forces. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 58 (2):173 - 205.
Peter John Vickers (2009). Was Newtonian Cosmology Really Inconsistent? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 40 (3):197-208.
Susan L. Hurley (1996). Myth Upon Myth. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 96:253-260.
Leonard Angel (2001). A Physical Model of Zeno's Dichotomy. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (2):347-358.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2010-09-02

Total downloads

3 ( #439,653 of 1,699,581 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #362,609 of 1,699,581 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.