David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Philosophical Research 27:433-448 (2002)
This essay explores two of the more neglected hypotheses that comprise, or supplement, Descartes’ relationalist doctrine of bodily motion. These criteria are of great importance, for they would appear to challenge Descartes’ principal judgment that motion is a purely reciprocal change of a body’s contiguous neighborhood. After critiquing the work of the few commentators who have previously examined these forgotten hypotheses, mainly, D. Garber and M. Gueroult, the overall strengths and weaknesses of Descartes’ supplementary criteria will be assessed. Overall, despite their ingenuity, it will be demonstrated that Descartes’ criteria cannot rescue his brand of natural laws from the inherent limitations of his strong relational account of motion
|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
Edward Slowik (1999). Descartes, Spacetime, and Relational Motion. Philosophy of Science 66 (1):117-139.
Richard Arthur (2007). Beeckman, Descartes and the Force of Motion. Journal of the History of Philosophy 45 (1):1--28.
Thomas M. Lennon (2007). The Eleatic Descartes. Journal of the History of Philosophy 45 (1):29-45.
M. T. (2003). Cartesian Causation: Body-Body Interaction, Motion, and Eternal Truths. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 34 (4):737-762.
Anja Jauernig (2008). Leibniz on Motion and the Equivalence of Hypotheses. The Leibniz Review 18:1-40.
Anja Jauernig (2009). Leibniz on Motion – Reply to Edward Slowik. The Leibniz Review 19:139-147.
Stephen Menn (1990). Descartes and Some Predecessors on the Divine Conservation of Motion. Synthese 83 (2):215 - 238.
Andrew R. Platt (2011). Divine Activity and Motive Power in Descartes's Physics. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 19 (4):623 - 646.
Geoffrey Gorham (2005). The Metaphysical Roots of Cartesian Physics: The Law of Rectilinear Motion. Perspectives on Science 13 (4):431-451.
Richard B. Carter (1982). Gilbert and Descartes: The Science of Conserving the Compound Body. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 13 (2):224-233.
Andrew Janiak (2012). Newton and Descartes: Theology and Natural Philosophy. Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (3):414-435.
John A. Schuster (2012). Physico-Mathematics and the Search for Causes in Descartes' Optics—1619–1637. Synthese 185 (3):467-499.
Added to index2011-12-02
Total downloads8 ( #159,174 of 1,096,391 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #58,553 of 1,096,391 )
How can I increase my downloads?