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 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
No references found.
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.
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.
Andrew Janiak & Eric Schliesser (eds.) (2012). Interpreting Newton: Critical Essays. Cambridge University Press.
Athanassios Raftopoulos (1999). Newton's Experimental Proofs as Eliminative Reasoning. Erkenntnis 50 (1):91-121.
Quayshawn Spencer (2004). Do Newton's Rules of Reasoning Guarantee Truth ... Must They? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 35 (4):759-782.
Steffen Ducheyne, The General Scholium: Some Notes on Newton's Published and Unpublished Endeavours.
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.
Jaime de Salas (1991). Hume and Newton. Philosophy and Theology 6 (1):21-38.
Alan Musgrave (2004). How Popper [Might Have] Solved the Problem of Induction. Philosophy 79 (1):19-31.
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 downloads14 ( #170,159 of 1,699,677 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #206,271 of 1,699,677 )
How can I increase my downloads?