The mechanical versus the mathematical conception of nature
Philosophy of Science 4 (1):41-74 (1937)
| Abstract | This article has no associated abstract. (fix it) | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesA. Chalmers (2002). Experiment Versus Mechanical Philosophy in the Work of Robert Boyle: A Reply to Anstey and Pyle. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 33 (1):187-193.
Jean-Pierre Marquis (1999). Mathematical Engineering and Mathematical Change. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13 (3):245 – 259.
Mary Leng, Alexander Paseau & Michael D. Potter (eds.) (2007). Mathematical Knowledge. Oxford University Press.
Janet Folina (1994). Poincaré's Conception of the Objectivity of Mathematics. Philosophia Mathematica 2 (3):202-227.
Hannah Ginsborg (2004). Two Kinds of Mechanical Inexplicability in Kant and Aristotle. Journal of the History of Philosophy 42 (1):33-65.
Frithiof Brandt (1928). Thomas Hobbes' Mechanical Conception of Nature. Copenhagen, Levin & Munksgaard; [Etc., Etc.].
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads5 ( #160,518 of 549,700 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,425 of 549,700 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
