Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (3):414-435 (2012)
|Abstract||Scholars have long recognized that Newton regarded Descartes as his principal philosophical interlocutor when composing the first edition of Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica in 1687. The arguments in the Scholium on space and time, for instance, can profitably be interpreted as focusing on the conception of space and motion in part two of Descartes's Principles of Philosophy (1644). What is less well known, however, is that this Cartesian conception, along with Descartes's attempt to avoid Galileo's fate in 1633, serves as an essential background to understanding Newton's own (poorly understood) view of the theological implications of his theory of space and motion. In particular, after withdrawing Le Monde from publication in 1633 because of its Copernican leanings, Descartes later introduced what some regard as a “fudge factor” into the theory of motion in the Principles: from an ordinary perspective the earth does move; but from a philosophical one, it does not. This background indicates the novelty and originality of Newton's own attempt to explicate how scriptural passages concerning the motions of the heavenly bodies can be reconciled with the philosophical views he developed during the 1680s. New evidence from archival sources and correspondence supports this argument, shedding light on the Scholium and on Newton's conception of philosophy's relation to theology|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Stephen D. Snobelen (2010). The Theology of Isaac Newton's Principia Mathematica : A Preliminary Survey. Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 52 (4).
Andrew Janiak (2008). Newton as Philosopher. Cambridge University Press.
Andrew Janiak & Eric Schliesser (eds.) (2012). Interpreting Newton: Critical Essays. Cambridge University Press.
Geoffrey Gorham (2011). Newton on God's Relation to Space and Time: The Cartesian Framework. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 93 (3):281-320.
Katherine A. Brading & Dana Jalobeanu, All Alone in the Universe: Individuals in Descartes and Newton.
Richard Arthur (1994). Space and Relativity in Newton and Leibniz. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 45 (1):219-240.
Isaac Newton (2004). Philosophical Writings. Cambridge, Uk ;Cambridge University Press.
Mary Domski (2010). Newton's Empiricism and Metaphysics. Philosophy Compass 5 (7):525-534.
Ori Belkind (forthcoming). Leibniz and Newton on Space. Foundations of Science.
J. E. McGuire (2007). A Dialogue with Descartes: Newton's Ontology of True and Immutable Natures. Journal of the History of Philosophy 45 (1):103-125.
Thomas M. Lennon (2007). The Eleatic Descartes. Journal of the History of Philosophy 45 (1):29-45.
Edward Slowik (1997). Huygens' Center-of-Mass Space-Time Reference Frame: Constructing a Cartesian Dynamics in the Wake of Newton's “de Gravitatione” Argument. Synthese 112 (2):247-269.
Nick Huggett (2008). Why the Parts of Absolute Space Are Immobile. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (3):391-407.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-09-05
Total downloads5 ( #160,171 of 548,972 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,511 of 548,972 )
How can I increase my downloads?