Note to readers: Originally I thought there was a stronger link between Maclaurin and Hume, however I now think it clear that Hume is not taking his mechanics out of Maclaurin’s Account. Although I still have found Maclaurin useful in interpreting Hume, I suspect this draft suffers somewhat from ambivalence. There are still similarities, and possible avenues of influence, arguing that Hume was not ignorant of the new mechanics, but it also becomes clear that he did not understand it: although he adopts the Newtonian measure of force, he misapplies it
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Newtonian Vs. Newtonian: Baxter and MacLaurin on the Inactivity of Matter.Fred Ablondi - 2013 - Journal of Scottish Philosophy 11 (1):15-23.
Maclaurin and Dyke on Analytic Metaphysics.Mike McLeod & Josh Parsons - 2013 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91 (1):173-178.
Newton and Spinoza: On Motion and Matter (and God, of Course).Eric Schliesser - 2012 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (3):436-458.
How Hume Became 'The New Hume': A Developmental Approach.James Hill - 2012 - Journal of Scottish Philosophy 10 (2):163-181.
A Note on Newton, Boyle, and Hume's “Experimental Method”.Eugene Sapadin - 1997 - Hume Studies 23 (2):337-344.
Critical Review of Recent Introductory Works on Hume. [REVIEW]Angela Coventry - 2010 - Hume Studies 36 (2):217-225.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads24 ( #206,355 of 2,153,497 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #399,080 of 2,153,497 )
How can I increase my downloads?