Philosophy of Science 67 (3):421-443 (2000)

Scott Tanona
Kansas State University
Kant's views on the epistemological status of physical science provide an important example of how a philosophical system can be applied to understand the foundation of scientific theories. Michael Friedman has made considerable progress towards elucidating Kant's philosophy of science; in particular, he has argued that Kant viewed Newton's law of universal gravitation as necessary for the possibility of experiencing what Kant called true motion, which is more than the mere relative motion of appearances but is different from Newton's concept of absolute motion. In this context, Friedman has provided an account of how Kant must have viewed Newton's supposed derivation of universal gravitation from Kepler's laws, based on, among other things, Kant's claim that Newton really needed to make extra assumptions in order to derive universal gravitation. In this paper, I argue that Friedman's account is incomplete for three reasons. First, Friedman has overlooked an important aspect of how Newton's third law is applied in the relevant sections of the Principia; as a result, Friedman's account partially misconstrues the relation between the planetary phenomena and the theory of universal gravitation. Second, his account fails to account for Kant's apparent belief that Kepler's laws are only empirically-based rules, even though they seem to be necessary for the derivation of universal gravitation and hence also necessary for Kant's own definition of true motion. Third, Friedman has overlooked some remarks by Kant that indicate that Kant thought the crucial properties of universal gravitation could be known without reference to the empirically determined motions of the planets and hence seemingly without any help from Newton
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1086/392789
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: 65,683
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Kant-Bibliographie 2000.Margit Ruffing - 2002 - Kant-Studien 93 (4):491-536.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Gravitation as a Universal Force.Dennis Dieks - 1987 - Synthese 73 (2):381 - 397.
The Argument(s) for Universal Gravitation.Steffen Ducheyne - 2006 - Foundations of Science 11 (4):419-447.
On Reading Newton as an Epicurean: Kant, Spinozism and the Changes to the Principia.Eric Schliesser - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 44 (3):416-428.
"From the Phenomena of Motions to the Forces of Nature": Hypothesis or Deduction?Howard Stein - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:209 - 222.
Newton's Classic Deductions From Phenomena.William Harper - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:183 - 196.


Added to PP index

Total views
69 ( #159,278 of 2,462,431 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,313 of 2,462,431 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes