David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Memorie Della Societa' Astronomica Italiana Supplementi 75:282-292 (2012)
The content of Boscovich’s Theoria philosophiae naturalis was well-known to his contemporaries, but both scientists and philosophers chiefly discussed it during the 19th century. The observations that Boscovich presented in this text, and that he himself defined as “philosophicas metitationes”, soon showed their being a good programme for the forthcoming atomic physics, and contributed to get rid of the mechanistic paradigm in science. In this paper I’ll go back to some meaningful moments of the history of Boscovich’s reception in the era of contemporary philosophy, by referring to what authors such as Popper, Cassirer, Nietzsche and Fechner wrote about him. These thinkers, indeed, particularly stressed the importance of the Theoria in the history of Western thought, and showed that it can easily be evaluated beyond the plane of a pure scientific investigation.
|Keywords||Ruggiero Boscovich Philosophy of Science History of Science|
|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
J. Félix Fuertes Martínez & José López García (1992). Roger Boscovich. Theoria 7 (1-2):687-701.
Martin Carrier (1985). Rudjer Boscovich Und Die Induktive Logik. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 16 (2):201-212.
José López García (1992). Roger Boscovich. Theoria 7 (1/2/3):687-701.
Robin Small (1986). Boscovich Contra Nietzsche. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 46 (3):419-435.
Keith Ansell Pearson (2000). Nietzsche's Brave New World of Force: On Nietzsche's 1873 "Time Atom Theory" Fragment and the Matter of Boscovich's Influence on Nietzsche. Journal of Nietzsche Studies 20:5-33.
Bence Nanay (2010). Rational Reconstruction Reconsidered. The Monist 93 (4):598-617.
Marga Vicedo (1992). Is the History of Science Relevant to the Philosophy of Science? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:490 - 496.
Michael R. Matthews (1994). Science Teaching: The Role of History and Philosophy of Science. Routledge.
Roger Ariew (1986). Descartes as Critic of Galileo's Scientific Methodology. Synthese 67 (1):77 - 90.
Ernst Cassirer (1963/2000). The Individual and the Cosmos in Renaissance Philosophy. Dover Publications.
James T. Cushing (1998). Philosophical Concepts in Physics: The Historical Relation Between Philosophy and Scientific Theories. Cambridge University Press.
Franccsca di Poppa (2001). Rational Reconstructions Revised. Theoria 16 (3):461-480.
Jouni-Matti Kuukkanen (2013). Kuhn's Legacy: Theoretical and Philosophical Study of History. [REVIEW] Topoi 32 (1):91-99.
Peter Machamer & Franccsca Di Poppa (2001). Rational Reconstructions Revised. Theoria 16 (3):461-480.
Added to index2012-07-23
Total downloads160 ( #10,511 of 1,725,833 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #64,764 of 1,725,833 )
How can I increase my downloads?