Leibniz and Newton on Space

Foundations of Science 18 (3):467-497 (2013)
Abstract
This paper reexamines the historical debate between Leibniz and Newton on the nature of space. According to the traditional reading, Leibniz (in his correspondence with Clarke) produced metaphysical arguments (relying on the Principle of Sufficient Reason and the Principle of Identity of Indiscernibles) in favor of a relational account of space. Newton, according to the traditional account, refuted the metaphysical arguments with the help of an empirical argument based on the bucket experiment. The paper claims that Leibniz’s and Newton’s arguments cannot be understood apart from the distinct dialectics of their respective positions vis-à-vis Descartes’ theory of space and physics. Against the traditional reading, the paper argues that Leibniz and Newton are operating within a different metaphysics and different conceptions of “place,” and that their respective arguments can largely remain intact without undermining the other philosopher’s conception of space. The paper also takes up the task of clarifying the distinction between true and absolute motion, and of explaining the relativity of motion implied by Leibniz’s account. The paper finally argues that the two philosophers have different conceptions of the relation between metaphysics and science, and that Leibniz’s attempt to base physical theory on an underlying metaphysical account of forces renders his account of physics unstable
Keywords Leibniz  Newton  Absolute space  Relationalism  Absolute motion  Laws of motion
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10699-011-9280-5
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 30,813
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
The Philosophical Writings of Descartes.René Descartes - 1984 - Cambridge University Press.
Quantum Physics and the Identity of Indiscernibles.Steven French & Michael Redhead - 1988 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 39 (2):233-246.
The Identity of Indiscernibles.Max Black - 1952 - Mind 61 (242):153-164.

View all 24 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Space and Relativity in Newton and Leibniz.Richard Arthur - 1994 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 45 (1):219-240.
Why the Parts of Absolute Space Are Immobile.Nick Huggett - 2008 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (3):391-407.
Newton on God's Relation to Space and Time: The Cartesian Framework.Geoffrey Gorham - 2011 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 93 (3):281-320.
Newton's Conceptual Argument for Absolute Space.Ori Belkind - 2007 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 21 (3):271 – 293.
Absolute Versus Relational Spacetime: For Better or Worse, the Debate Goes On.Carl Hoefer - 1998 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (3):451-467.
Leibniz on Force and Absolute Motion.John T. Roberts - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (3):553-573.
Kant's Early Theory of Motion.Marius Stan - 2009 - The Leibniz Review 19:29-61.
Added to PP index
2012-04-04

Total downloads
67 ( #81,469 of 2,202,700 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #25,853 of 2,202,700 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature