Early Science and Medicine 9 (2):73-114 (2004)

This paper draws attention to the crucial importance of a new kind of precisely defined law of nature in the Scientific Revolution. All explanations in the mechanical philosophy depend upon the interactions of moving material particles; the laws of nature stipulate precisely how these interact; therefore, such explanations rely on the laws of nature. While this is obvious, the radically innovatory nature of these laws is not fully acknowledged in the historical literature. Indeed, a number of scholars have tried to locate the origins of such laws in the medieval period. In the first part of this paper these claims are critically examined, and found at best to reveal important aspects of the background to the later idea, which could be drawn upon for legitimating purposes by the mechanical philosophers. The second part of the paper argues that the modern concept of laws of nature originates in René Descartes's work. It is shown that Descartes took his concept of laws of nature from the mathematical tradition, but recognized that he could not export it to the domain of physico-mathematics, to play a causal role, unless he could show that these laws were underwritten by God. It is argued that this is why, at an early stage of his philosophical development, Descartes had to turn to metaphysics
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1163/1573382041154051
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,114
External links

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

Force (God) in Descartes' Physics.Gary C. Hatfield - 1979 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 10 (2):113-140.
The Genesis of the Concept of Physical Law.Edgar Zilsel - 1942 - Philosophical Review 51 (3):245-279.
Epistemology of the Sciences.Nicholas Jardine - 1988 - In Charles B. Schmitt, Quentin Skinner & Eckhard Kessler (eds.), The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy. Cambridge University Press. pp. 685--711.
Reason, Nature, and God in Descartes.Gary Hatfield - 1993 - In Stephen Voss (ed.), Essays on the Philosophy and Science of Rene Descartes. Oxford University Press. pp. 259–287.

View all 8 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

View all 22 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Laws and Lawmakers: Science, Metaphysics, and the Laws of Nature. [REVIEW]Barry Ward - 2012 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 43 (2):155-158.
The Contingency of Laws of Nature in Science and Theology.Lydia Jaeger - 2010 - Foundations of Physics 40 (9-10):1611-1624.
The Bounds of Law: Universality in Science.David Gruender - 1984 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1984:95-101.
Can Primitive Laws Explain?Tyler Hildebrand - 2013 - Philosophers' Imprint 13:1-15.
Armstrong and van Fraassen on Probabilistic Laws of Nature.Duncan Maclean - 2012 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 42 (1):1-13.
Laws of Nature, Natural History, and the Description of the World.James W. McAllister - 1997 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 11 (3):245 – 258.
Laws of Nature.John W. Carroll - 1994 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.


Added to PP index

Total views
64 ( #176,971 of 2,499,262 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
10 ( #72,910 of 2,499,262 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes