In James Maclaurin (ed.), Rationis Defensor (2012)

Kirsten Walsh
University of Exeter
Newton’s famous pronouncement, Hypotheses non fingo, first appeared in 1713, but his anti-hypothetical stance was present as early as 1672. For example, in his first paper on optics, Newton claims that his doctrine of light and colours is a theory, not a hypothesis, for three reasons (1) It is certainly true, because it supported by (or deduced from) experiment; (2) It concerns the physical properties of light, rather than the nature of light; and (3) It has testable consequences. Despite his clear anti-hypothetical statements, a corpuscular hypothesis lies beneath Newton’s theory of colours. What are we to make of this? Is Newton guilty of feigning a hypothesis? Some writers, such as Sabre and Dear, argue that Newton’s Hypotheses non fingo is merely ‘lip-service’ to the dominant methodological tradition. Others, such as Janiak, argue that Newton’s anti-hypotheticalism is a polemic device, designed specifically to oppose his Cartesian and Leibnizian critics. I argue that, despite his corpuscular hypothesis, we should take Newton’s pronouncement as a genuine account of his methodology. I take a fresh look at Newton’s first optical papers in light of the role of hypotheses in the Baconian-experimental tradition in which Newton’s early research was conducted. I argue that Newton is working with a rough but genuine distinction between hypothesis and theory. This distinction is consistent with both the Baconian-experimental method and with his later anti-hypothetical pronouncements. I conclude that Newton did not ‘feign’ the corpuscular hypothesis.
Keywords Newton  Optics  Hypothesis  Theory of Colours  Baconian Experimental Tradition
Categories (categorize this paper)
Buy the book Find it on
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 62,268
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Why Experiments Matter.Arnon Levy & Adrian Currie - 2018 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 62 (9-10):1066-1090.
Frameworks for Historians & Philosophers.Adrian Currie & Kirsten Walsh - 2018 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 9:1-34.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Locke's Philosophy of Science.Hylarie Kochiras - 2009 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Newton’s Empiricism and Metaphysics.Mary Domski - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (7):525-534.
Mathematical Models in Newton’s Principia: A New View of the “Newtonian Style”.Steffen Ducheyne - 2005 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 19 (1):1 – 19.
Some Remarks About Newton's Demonstrations in Optics: Newton's Missing Experiment.Vicente Aboites - 2002 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 53 (3):455-458.
Newton's "Experimental Philosophy".Alan Shapiro - 2002 - Early Science and Medicine 9 (3):185-217.


Added to PP index

Total views
34 ( #316,800 of 2,444,876 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #457,287 of 2,444,876 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes