22 found
Order:
See also
Marius Stan
Boston College
  1. Euler, Newton, and Foundations for Mechanics.Marius Stan - 2017 - In Chris Smeenk & Eric Schliesser (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Newton. Oxford University Press. pp. 1-22.
    This chapter looks at Euler’s relation to Newton, and at his role in the rise of ‘Newtonian’ mechanics. It aims to give a sense of Newton’s complicated legacy for Enlightenment science, and to raise awareness that some key ‘Newtonian’ results really come from Euler.
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Huygens on Inertial Structure and Relativity.Marius Stan - 2016 - Philosophy of Science 83 (2):277-298.
    I explain and assess here Huygens’ concept of relative motion. I show that it allows him to ground most of the Law of Inertia, and also to explain rotation. Thereby his concept obviates the need for Newton’s absolute space. Thus his account is a powerful foundation for mechanics, though not without some tension.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Absolute Time: The Limit of Kant's Idealism.Marius Stan - 2017 - Noûs.
    I examine here if Kant can explain our knowledge of duration by showing that time has metric structure. To do so, I spell out two possible solutions: time’s metric could be intrinsic or extrinsic. I argue that Kant’s resources are too weak to secure an intrinsic, transcendentally-based temporal metrics; but he can supply an extrinsic metric, based in a metaphysical fact about matter. I conclude that Transcendental Idealism is incomplete: it cannot account for the durative aspects of experience—or it can (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Emilie du Chatelet's Metaphysics of Substance.Marius Stan - 2018 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 56 (3):477-496.
    much early modern metaphysics grew with an eye to the new science of its time, but few figures took it as seriously as Emilie du Châtelet. Happily, her oeuvre is now attracting close, renewed attention, and so the time is ripe for looking into her metaphysical foundation for empirical theory. Accordingly, I move here to do just that. I establish two conclusions. First, du Châtelet's basic metaphysics is a robust realism. Idealist strands, while they exist, are confined to non-basic regimes. (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Kant’s Third Law of Mechanics: The Long Shadow of Leibniz.Marius Stan - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 44 (3):493-504.
    This paper examines the origin, range and meaning of the Principle of Action and Reaction in Kant’s mechanics. On the received view, it is a version of Newton’s Third Law. I argue that Kant meant his principle as foundation for a Leibnizian mechanics. To find a ‘Newtonian’ law of action and reaction, we must look to Kant’s ‘dynamics,’ or theory of matter. I begin, in part I, by noting marked differences between Newton’s and Kant’s laws of action and reaction. I (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  6. Absolute Space and the Riddle of Rotation: Kant’s Response to Newton.Marius Stan - 2015 - Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy 7:257-308.
    Newton had a fivefold argument that true motion must be motion in absolute space, not relative to matter. Like Newton, Kant holds that bodies have true motions. Unlike him, though, Kant takes all motion to be relative to matter, not to space itself. Thus, he must respond to Newton’s argument above. I reconstruct here Kant’s answer in detail. I prove that Kant addresses just one part of Newton’s case, namely, his “argument from the effects” of rotation. And, to show that (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Kant's Early Theory of Motion.Marius Stan - 2009 - The Leibniz Review 19:29-61.
    This paper examines the young Kant’s claim that all motion is relative, and argues that it is the core of a metaphysical dynamics of impact inspired by Leibniz and Wolff. I start with some background to Kant’s early dynamics, and show that he rejects Newton’s absolute space as a foundation for it. Then I reconstruct the exact meaning of Kant’s relativity, and the model of impact he wants it to support. I detail (in Section II and III) his polemic engagement (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  8. Newton's Concepts of Force Among the Leibnizians.Marius Stan - 2017 - In Mordechai Feingold & Elizabethanne Boran (eds.), Reading Newton in Early Modern Europe. Leiden: Brill. pp. 244-289.
    I argue that the key dynamical concepts and laws of Newton's Principia never gained a solid foothold in Germany before Kant in the 1750s. I explain this absence as due to Leibniz. Thus I make a case for a robust Leibnizian legacy for Enlightenment science, and I solve what Jonathan Israel called “a meaningful historical problem on its own,” viz. the slow and hesitant reception of Newton in pre-Kantian Germany.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. Review: Friedman, Michael, Kant's Construction of Nature.Marius Stan - 2014 - Metascience 23 (2):233-242.
  10.  39
    Kant's Philosophy of Science.Eric Watkins & Marius Stan - 2014 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  11. Kant and the Object of Determinate Experience.Marius Stan - 2015 - Philosophers' Imprint 15:1-19.
    On an influential view, Newton's mechanics is built into Kant's very theory of exact knowledge. However, Newtonian dynamics had serious explanatory limits already known by 1750. Thus, we might worry that Kant's Analytic is too narrow to ground enough exact knowledge. In this paper, I draw on Enlightenment dynamics to show that Kant's notion of determinate objecthood is sufficiently broad, non-trivial, and still relevant to the present.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12. Unity for Kant’s Natural Philosophy.Marius Stan - 2014 - Philosophy of Science 81 (3):423-443.
    I uncover here a conflict in Kant’s natural philosophy. His matter theory and laws of mechanics are in tension. Kant’s laws are fit for particles but are too narrow to handle continuous bodies, which his doctrine of matter demands. To fix this defect, Kant ultimately must ground the Torque Law; that is, the impressed torque equals the change in angular momentum. But that grounding requires a premise—the symmetry of the stress tensor—that Kant denies himself. I argue that his problem would (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. Metaphysical Foundations of Neoclassical Mechanics.Marius Stan - 2017 - In Michela Massimi & Angela Breitenbach (eds.), Kant and the Laws of Nature. Cambridge University Press. pp. 214-234.
    I examine here if Kant’s metaphysics of matter can support any late-modern versions of classical mechanics. I argue that in principle it can, by two different routes. I assess the interpretive costs of each approach, and recommend the most promising strategy: a mass-point approach.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14. Perpetuum Mobiles and Eternity.Marius Stan - 2016 - In Yitzhak Melamed (ed.), Eternity: the History of a Concept. Oxford University Press. pp. 173-178.
    Leibniz is committed to a form of cosmic eternity, on account of his natural theology and foundations for dynamics. However, his views on perpetuum mobiles entail that a particularly attractive type of cosmic eternity is out of reach for Leibniz.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. Kant's Philosophy of Mechanics in 1758.Marius Stan - 2011 - In Oliver Thorndike (ed.), Rethinking Kant, vol. III. Cambridge Scholars Press. pp. 158-179.
  16. Review: Kant, Natural Science.Marius Stan - 2014 - Metascience 23 (1):65-70.
  17.  68
    Rationalist Foundations and the Science of Force.Marius Stan - forthcoming - In Brandon Look & Frederick Beiser (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of German Eighteenth-Century Philosophy. Oxford University Press.
  18. Newton and Wolff.Marius Stan - 2012 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (3):459-481.
    Newton rested his theory of mechanics on distinct metaphysical and epistemological foundations. After Leibniz's death in 1716, the Principia ran into sharp philosophical opposition from Christian Wolff and his disciples, who sought to subvert Newton's foundations or replace them with Leibnizian ideas. In what follows, I chronicle some of the Wolffians' reactions to Newton's notion of absolute space, his dynamical laws of motion, and his general theory of gravitation. I also touch on arguments advanced by Newton's Continental followers, such as (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19.  16
    From General to Special Metaphysics of Nature.Michael Bennett McNulty & Marius Stan - 2017 - In Matthew Altman (ed.), The Palgrave Kant Handbook. London: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 493-511.
    In his Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science, Kant presents the “pure part” of natural science – that is, the a priori principles holding of matter. This special metaphysics of matter is, Kant claims, grounded on the general metaphysics of nature described in the System of Principles of his first Critique. This chapter develops a comprehensive account of Kant’s framework for natural science that touches on interpretive issues that arise in the transition from general to special metaphysics and that outlines his (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20.  19
    Eric Voegelin, Religiile Politice. [REVIEW]Marius Stan - 2012 - History of Communism in Europe 3:194-199.
  21.  13
    Review: Massimi, Michela (Ed.), Kant and Philosophy of Science Today[REVIEW]Marius Stan - 2011 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 1 (2):364-367.
  22.  2
    Michela Massimi, Ed. Kant and Philosophy of Science Today. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Pp. 204. $31.99. [REVIEW]Marius Stan - 2011 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 1 (2):364-367.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark