David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Perspectives on Science 8 (3):201-222 (2000)
Within twenty years of one another, Bacon and Descartes proposed cosmologies which relied heavily on matter theory. In both, the distribution of matter in the cosmos determined what centers of rotation there were, and rotating bodies were carried around by the motion of an all-encompassing celestial fluid in which they were embedded. But the role of matter theory in the two accounts is very different, both in motivation and in the level at which it is active in guiding physical theory. Matter theory in Baconian cosmology stands as a foundational discipline, being virtually constitutive of physical theory, as it had been for natural philosophers from Thales onwards, whereas in Descartes it is subservient to the needs of his optics and his mechanics. Comparison of the two cases shows how the role of matter theory came to be radically modified in seventeenth-century cosmology.
|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
René Descartes, Ch Adam & Paul Tannery (1982). Oeuvres de Descartes. Monograph Collection (Matt - Pseudo).
Hans Blumenberg (1989). The Genesis of the Copernican World. The MIT Press.
Graham Rees (2006). Atomism and 'Subtlety' in Francis Bacon's Philosophy. Annals of Science 37 (5):549-571.
Klass van Berkel (2000). Descartes' Debt to Beeckman: Inspiration, Cooperation, Conflict. In John Schuster, Stephen Gaukroger & John Sutton (eds.), Descartes' Natural Philosophy. Routledge
Jean Robert Armogathe (1977). Theologia Cartesiana l'Explication Physique de l'Eucharistie Chez Descartes Et Dom Desgabets. M. Nijhoff.
Citations of this work BETA
S. Gaukroger & J. Schuster (2002). The Hydrostatic Paradox and the Origins of Cartesian Dynamics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 33 (3):535-572.
Similar books and articles
John Dempsher (1980). A Bio-Physical Basis of Mathematics in Synaptic Function of the Nervous System: A Theory. Acta Biotheoretica 29 (3-4):119-127.
James G. Snyder (2008). The Theory of Materia Prima in Marsilio Ficino's Platonic Theology. Vivarium 46 (2):192-221.
Jay McDaniel (1983). Physical Matter as Creative and Sentient. Environmental Ethics 5 (4):291-317.
Gad Freudenthal (2002). The Medieval Astrologization of Aristotle's Biology: Averroes on the Role of the Celestial Bodies in the Generation of Animate Beings. Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 12 (1):111-137.
Mladen Domazet (2008). Cartesian Primary Qualities in Light of Some Contemporary Physical Explanations. Prolegomena 7 (1):21-35.
Rogene A. Buchholz & Sandra B. Rosenthal (2004). Stakeholder Theory and Public Policy: How Governments Matter. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 51 (2):143-153.
Kurt Smith (2010). Matter Matters: Metaphysics and Methodology in the Early Modern Period. Oxford University Press.
Paavo Pylkkänen (2010). Implications of Bohmian Quantum Ontology for Psychopathology. Neuroquantology 8 (1):37-48.
N. Sieroka (2010). Geometrization Versus Transcendent Matter: A Systematic Historiography of Theories of Matter Following Weyl. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (4):769-802.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #255,139 of 1,790,149 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #427,637 of 1,790,149 )
How can I increase my downloads?