Atomism, Experiment and the Mechanical Philosophy: The Work of Robert Boyle

Author(s):  
Alan Chalmers
2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-188
Author(s):  
Jeff Kochan

Abstract William Gilbert’s 1600 book, De magnete, greatly influenced early modern natural philosophy. The book describes an impressive array of physical experiments, but it also advances a metaphysical view at odds with the soon to emerge mechanical philosophy. That view was animism. I distinguish two kinds of animism – Aristotelian and Platonic – and argue that Gilbert was an Aristotelian animist. Taking Robert Boyle as an example, I then show that early modern arguments against animism were often effective only against Platonic animism. In fact, unacknowledged traces of Aristotelian animism can be found in Boyle’s mechanical account of nature. This was Gilbert’s legacy.


Author(s):  
David S. Sytsma

This chapter sets Baxter’s involvement with mechanical philosophy against the backdrop of the growth of mechanical philosophy, with particular attention to the growing interest in Epicurean ideas and the work of Pierre Gassendi. Baxter’s engagement with mechanical philosophy is traced in chronological sequence from the 1650s until his death in 1691. In the course of this narrative, Baxter’s personal relationships to Joseph Glanvill, Robert Boyle, Matthew Hale, and Henry More are surveyed. The context of Baxter’s manuscript and published works relating to mechanical philosophy are also discussed. Matthew Hale appears as a significant figure in the development of Baxter’s philosophical thought, as well as the production of his published works and the suppression from publication of an important manuscript on the nature and immortality of the soul.


Author(s):  
David S. Sytsma

This chapter argues for Baxter’s importance as a theologian engaged with philosophy. Although Baxter is largely known today as a practical theologian, he also excelled in knowledge of the scholastics and was known in the seventeenth century also for his scholastic theology. He followed philosophical trends closely, was connected with many people involved in mechanical philosophy, and responded directly to the ideas of René Descartes, Pierre Gassendi, Robert Boyle, Thomas Willis, Thomas Hobbes, and Benedict de Spinoza. As a leading Puritan and nonconformist, his views are especially relevant to the question of the relation of the Puritan tradition to the beginnings of modern science and philosophy. The chapter introduces the way in which “mechanical philosophy” will be used, and concludes with a brief synopsis of the argument of the book.


2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 248-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Newman

AbstractThe historical treatment of atomism and the mechanical philosophy largely neglects what I call "chymical atomism," namely a type of pre-Daltonian corpuscular matter theory that postulated particles of matter which were operationally indivisible. From the Middle Ages onwards, alchemists influenced by Aristotle's Meteorology, De caelo, and De generatione et corruptione argued for the existence of robust corpuscles of matter that resisted analysis by laboratory means. As I argue in the present paper, this alchemical tradition entered the works of Daniel Sennert and Robert Boyle, and became the common property of seventeenth-century chymists. Through Boyle, G.E. Stahl, and other chymists, the operational atomism of the alchemists was even transmitted to Antoine Laurent Lavoisier, where it became the basis of his claim that elements are simply "the final limit that analysis reaches."


1665 ◽  
Vol 1 (11) ◽  
pp. 191-197

This curious and excellent piece, is a kind of introduction to the principles of the mechanical philosophy, explicating, by very considerable observations and experiments, what may be, according to such principles, conceived of the nature and origine of qualities and forms; the knowledge whereof, either makes or supposes the fundamental and useful part of natural philosophy.


2003 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
FREDERIC LAWRENCE HOLMES

ABSTRACT: In the received history, chemistry began to transform from cookery to science toward the end of the 17th century with the introduction of sustained systematic experiment, color indicators, and the mechanical philosophy. Robert Boyle is usually considered the chief promoter of these improvements. In fact, the mechanical philosophy played a marginal part in the development of chemistry during Boyle's time and he was too eager an alchemical adept to establish the cooperative enterprise that precipitated modern chemistry. While Boyle sought the philosopher's stone, members of the Paris Academy of Sciences set the course of modern chemistry by developing a style of thorough, repeated, systematic experimentation and accurate measurement that resemble the practices that historians customarily credit to the late 18th century. The present paper makes this case by reconstructing the Academy's program of experiments to determine the constituents of chemical ““mixts,”” mainly parts of plants, as recorded in the laboratory notebooks of Claude Bourdelin. These experiments typically employed maceration or a similar technique to ““loosen”” the ingredients of the substance under investigation followed by distillation at various temperatures. The academicians tested the several fractions of distillate thus produced with many reagents, including color indicators of acidity. Some of the preliminary steps lasted for weeks, and some of the distillations for days. To reassure themselves that their procedures did not destroy or discard important constituents, they weighed both raw materials and end products and totted up the sum in a manner worthy of Lavoisier.


Author(s):  
Jack MacIntosh

Mechanism is the view that the material world is composed of small particles (corpuscles, or atoms), whose motion, size, shape, and various arrangements and clusterings provide the theoretical background for the explanation of all happenings in the physical universe. Early modern authors, whether mechanists or not, assumed that the matter composing these particles was one and the same throughout the universe. With very few exceptions, they also assumed that there were immaterial entities such as human minds (or souls) and angels. This view, which became the dominant one during the seventeenth century, had earlier precursors, both in classical times and in the Renaissance period, but the major earlier view, following Aristotle, explained the behaviour of material things in virtue of their form or nature: snow was white because it was the kind of thing that was white: it was the nature of snow to be white. By this ‘way of dispatching difficulties, they make it very easy to solve All the Phænomena of Nature in Generall, but make men think it impossible to explicate almost Any of them in Particular’, said Robert Boyle, adding that it was only the ‘Comprehensive Principles of the Corpuscularian Philosophy’ which would allow unmysterious explanations of physical phenomena (Boyle 1999, 5: 300–1). However, many of the things mechanism was invoked to explain – gravity and magnetism, for example – remained inexplicable on simple mechanistic accounts. Nonetheless, one important and lasting result of ‘the mechanical philosophy’ was the acceptance of the requirement that all explanations be understandable, that is, explicable in terms of elementary particles and their motion. In the hands of thinkers such as Galileo, Descartes, Boyle, and Newton this led to a reliance on experience and experiment, often controlled and quantified experiments, in place of the older, Aristotelian, model which viewed science as involving the deduction of necessary, universal, truths, from premises which were themselves necessary.


Author(s):  
David S. Sytsma

Richard Baxter, one of the most famous Puritans of the seventeenth century, is generally known as a writer of practical and devotional literature. But he also excelled in knowledge of medieval and early modern scholastic theology, and was conversant with a wide variety of seventeenth-century philosophies. Baxter was among the early English polemicists to write against the mechanical philosophy of René Descartes and Pierre Gassendi in the years immediately following the establishment of the Royal Society. At the same time, he was friends with Robert Boyle and Matthew Hale, corresponded with Joseph Glanvill, and engaged in philosophical controversy with Henry More. This book is a chronological and thematic account of Baxter’s relation to the people and concepts involved in the rise of mechanical philosophy in late seventeenth-century England. Drawing on largely unexamined works, including Baxter’s Methodus theologiae christianae (1681) and manuscript treatises and correspondence, this book discusses Baxter’s response to mechanical philosophers on the nature of substance, laws of motion, the soul, and ethics. Analysis of these topics is framed by a consideration of the growth of Christian Epicureanism in England, Baxter’s overall approach to reason and philosophy, and his attempt to understand creation as an analogical reflection of God’s power, wisdom, and goodness, understood as vestigia Trinitatis. Baxter’s views on reason, analogical knowledge of God, and vestigia Trinitatis draw on medieval precedents and directly inform a largely hostile, though partially accommodating, response to mechanical philosophy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document