Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Wallifaction: Thomas Hobbes on School Divinity and Experimental Pneumatics.Simon Schaffer - 1988 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 19 (3):275-298.
  • Physico-Mathematics and the Search for Causes in Descartes' Optics—1619–1637.John A. Schuster - 2012 - Synthese 185 (3):467-499.
    One of the chief concerns of the young Descartes was with what he, and others, termed “physico-mathematics”. This signalled a questioning of the Scholastic Aristotelian view of the mixed mathematical sciences as subordinate to natural philosophy, non explanatory, and merely instrumental. Somehow, the mixed mathematical disciplines were now to become intimately related to natural philosophical issues of matter and cause. That is, they were to become more ’physicalised’, more closely intertwined with natural philosophising, regardless of which species of natural philosophy (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Human Freedom and Divine Creation in Malebranche, Descartes and the Cartesians.Tad M. Schmaltz - 1994 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 2 (2):3 – 50.
  • Principles of Motion and the Absence of Laws of Nature in Hobbes’s Natural Philosophy.Stathis Psillos & Eirini Goudarouli - 2019 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 9 (1):93-119.
  • The Parallelogram Rule From Pseudo-Aristotle to Newton.David Marshall Miller - 2017 - Archive for History of Exact Sciences 71 (2):157-191.
    The history of the Parallelogram Rule for composing physical quantities, such as motions and forces, is marked by conceptual difficulties leading to false starts and halting progress. In particular, authors resisted the required assumption that the magnitude and the direction of a quantity can interact and are jointly necessary to represent the quantity. Consequently, the origins of the Rule cannot be traced to Pseudo-Aristotle or Stevin, as commonly held, but to Fermat, Hobbes, and subsequent developments in the latter part of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Ruggiero Boscovich and “the Forces Existing in Nature”.Luca Guzzardi - 2017 - Science in Context 30 (4):385-422.
    ArgumentAccording to a long-standing interpretation which traces back to Max Jammer'sConcepts of Force, Ruggiero G. Boscovich would have developed a concept of force in the tradition of Leibniz's dynamics. In his variation on the theme, basic properties of matter such as solidity or impenetrability would be derived from an interplay of some “active” force of attraction and repulsion that any primary element of nature would possess. In the present paper I discuss many flaws of this interpretation and argue for an (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Hobbes’s Model of Refraction and Derivation of the Sine Law.Hao Dong - 2021 - Archive for History of Exact Sciences 75 (3):323-348.
    This paper aims both to tackle the technical issue of deciphering Hobbes’s derivation of the sine law of refraction and to throw some light to the broader issue of Hobbes’s mechanical philosophy. I start by recapitulating the polemics between Hobbes and Descartes concerning Descartes’ optics. I argue that, first, Hobbes’s criticisms do expose certain shortcomings of Descartes’ optics which presupposes a twofold distinction between real motion and inclination to motion, and between motion itself and determination of motion; second, Hobbes’s optical (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
  • "Conatus", Hobbes, and the Young Leibniz.Howard R. Bernstein - 1980 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 11 (1):25.