David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 34 (4):763-780 (2003)
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.
|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
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.
J. Worrall (2000). The Scope, Limits, and Distinctiveness of the Method of 'Deduction From the Phenomena': Some Lessons From Newton's 'Demonstrations' in Optics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 51 (1):45-80.
Isaac Newton (1704). Opticks. Dover Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Mary Domski (2003). The Constructible and the Intelligible in Newton's Philosophy of Geometry. Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1114-1124.
Alan Musgrave (2004). How Popper [Might Have] Solved the Problem of Induction. Philosophy 79 (1):19-31.
Jaime de Salas (1991). Hume and Newton. Philosophy and Theology 6 (1):21-38.
Eric Schliesser (2013). On Reading Newton as an Epicurean: Kant, Spinozism and the Changes to the Principia. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 44 (3):416-428.
Steffen Ducheyne, The General Scholium: Some Notes on Newton's Published and Unpublished Endeavours.
Quayshawn Spencer (2004). Do Newton's Rules of Reasoning Guarantee Truth ... Must They? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 35 (4):759-782.
Athanassios Raftopoulos (1999). Newton's Experimental Proofs as Eliminative Reasoning. Erkenntnis 50 (1):91-121.
Andrew Janiak & Eric Schliesser (eds.) (2012). Interpreting Newton: Critical Essays. Cambridge University Press.
Steffen Ducheyne (2005). Mathematical Models in Newton's Principia: A New View of the 'Newtonian Style'. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 19 (1):1 – 19.
Stephen D. Snobelen (2010). The Theology of Isaac Newton's Principia Mathematica : A Preliminary Survey. Neue Zeitschrift für Systematicsche Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 52 (4):377-412.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads17 ( #216,615 of 1,906,955 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #468,378 of 1,906,955 )
How can I increase my downloads?