The System of Physics

Author(s):  
Dmitri Nikulin

Chapter 10 considers the structure of Proclus’ rarely discussed Elements of Physics and its original contribution to the understanding of physics in antiquity. It is argued that the purpose of the treatise is not only a systematic arrangement of the arguments scattered throughout Aristotle’s works on natural philosophy, using the structure of Euclid’s Elements as a model. Proclus also aims to develop a universal theory of motion or physical change that establishes the first principles as definitions, formulates and demonstrates a number of mutually related propositions about natural objects, and culminates in establishing the existence and properties of the prime mover. Unlike modern physics, which presupposes the applicability of mathematics to physics, Proclus shows that the study of natural phenomena in the more geometrico way can be a systematic rational science arranged by means of logic rather than mathematics.

1938 ◽  
Vol 57 ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max Born

The Chair which I have been elected to occupy, in succession to Professor Darwin, is associated with the name of a great scholar of our fathers' generation, Peter Guthrie Tait. This name has been familiar to me from the time when I first began to study mathematical physics. At that time Felix Klein was the leading figure in a group of outstanding mathematicians at Göttingen, amongst them Hilbert and Minkowski. I remember how Klein, ever eager to link physics with mathematics, missed no opportunity of pointing out to us students the importance of studying carefully the celebrated Treatise on Natural Philosophy of Thomson and Tait, which became a sort of Bible of mathematical science for us.


1972 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
pp. 425-427
Author(s):  
R. A. Home

‘Science,’ wrote Ernst Cassirer in his Essay on Man, ‘begins with a quest for simplicity.’ Remarkably enough, tradition has preserved the name of the man who first undertook such a quest: the first scientist. He was Thales of Miletus (ca 624–545 b.c.), one of the Seven Wise Men of the ancient world and the founder of the great Ionian school of natural philosophy. He appears to have been the first to have found the courage to abandon traditional mythopoetic explanation and to try and account for natural phenomena in terms of natural forces. As Aristotle, incidentally, the last of the Ionian scientists, put it, Thales was the founder of the philosophy which asserts that ‘the principles which (are) of the nature of matter (are) the only principles of all things’ (Aristotle a).


Author(s):  
Patrick Rysiew

Thomas Reid (1710–96) was a contemporary of both Hume and Kant. He was born in Strachan, near Aberdeen, and was a founder and central figure in the Scottish school of common sense philosophy. Educated at Marishal College, Aberdeen, Reid served as Librarian there, and then as Minister at New Machar. While regent at King’s College, Reid cofounded the Aberdeen Philosophical Society, or Wise Club (1758), other members of which included George Campbell, Alexander Gerard, John Stewart and James Beattie. During this period, Reid published his first major work, An Inquiry into the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense (1764). That same year, he succeeded Adam Smith in the professorship of Moral Philosophy in Glasgow College, where he remained for the rest of his life. Reid published two other major works, Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man (1785) and Essays on the Active Powers of Man (1788). Reid himself claimed that his main achievement was having called into question the widely held view (‘the theory of ideas’) that the immediate object of thought is always some idea in the mind of the thinker, the sceptical tendencies of which Hume brought to full fruition. But his philosophy contains many important positive contributions beyond that, including an articulation of the first principles of common sense, which he took to be the foundation of all thought and action, philosophical or otherwise. In place of the theory of ideas, Reid defended direct theories of memory and perception. As part of his critique of Hume and his predecessors, Reid articulates a distinction between sensation and perception and provides an account of how experience extends our perceptual powers. Reid rejects a picture of the individual as cut off from the world, and as passively registering various images and feelings. Most of the mind’s operations incorporate judgment, according to Reid. And our judgments, though fallible, yield knowledge of such matters as our nature and wellbeing require, including knowledge of material things and their properties, past events, states of others’ minds, and moral and aesthetic facts. Accompanying the movement away from the excessive, idea-centred individualism of previous theories is the emphasis Reid places on our deeply social nature. This shows up in his insistence that testimony is a basic source of knowledge, that some of the mind’s fundamental operations are essentially social, that humans possess a natural language that provides a pre-reflective, preconventional means of communicative interaction, that the meaning of a term is not an idea but the typically public object to which it refers, and that most of our general conceptions are acquired in the course of learning a public language. Reid insists that the locus of causal power is the agent, and that the self is not merely a material thing being pushed about by laws of nature. Science teaches us about the latter; but such laws are merely the regularities according to which things occur, and it is no part of natural philosophy to inquire into the real, efficient causes of things – that is, the source of motion or change. Our moral and aesthetic judgments are no less objective, and no less capable of truth and falsity, than are our perceptual judgments, and they too are underwritten by first principles. In both his moral and aesthetic theories, Reid relies on comparisons with perception as part of his account of how we acquire the relevant knowledge.


Author(s):  
Roger Gallie

Thomas Reid, born at Strachan, Aberdeen, was the founder of the Scottish school of Common Sense philosophy. Educated at Marishal College, Aberdeen, he taught at King’s College, Aberdeen until appointed professor of moral philosophy at Glasgow. He was the co-founder of the Aberdeen Philosophical Society or ‘Wise Club’, which counted among its members George Campbell, John Stewart, Alexander Gerard and James Beattie. His most noteworthy early work, An Inquiry into the Human Mind: Or the Principles of Common Sense attracted the attention of David Hume and secured him his professorship. Other important works are Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man (1785) and Essays on the Active Powers of the Human Mind (1788). Reid is not the first philosopher to appeal to common sense; Berkeley and Butler are notable British predecessors in this respect, in the discussions of perception and of free will respectively. It fell to Reid, however, to collect and systematize the deliverances of common sense – the first principles, upon the acceptance of which all justification depends – and to provide adequate criteria for that status. Reid insists we rightly rely on our admittedly fallible faculties of judgment, including the five senses, as well as memory, reason, the moral sense and taste, without need of justification. After all, we have no other resources for making judgments, to call upon in justification of this reliance. We cannot dispense with our belief that we are continually existing and sometimes fully responsible agents, influenced by motives rather than overwhelmed by passions or appetites. In Reid’s view major sceptical errors in philosophy arise from downgrading the five senses to mere inlets for mental images – ideas – of external objects, and from downgrading other faculties to mere capacities for having such images or for experiencing feelings. This variety of scepticism ultimately reduces everything to a swirl of mental images and feelings. However we no more conceive such images than perceive or remember them; and our discourse, even in the case of fiction, is not about them either. Names signify individuals or fictional characters rather than images of them; when I envisage a centaur it is an animal I envisage rather than the image of an animal. In particular the information our five senses provide in a direct or non-inferential manner is, certainly in the case of touch, about bodies in space. Reid thus seems to be committed to the position that our individual perceptual judgments are first principles in spite of his admission that our perceptual faculties are fallible. Moreover, moral and aesthetic judgments cannot be mere expressions of feeling if they are to serve their purposes; a moral assessor is not a ‘feeler’. Reid is therefore sure that there are first principles of morals, a view that scarcely fits the extent and degree of actual moral disagreement. Reid offers alternative direct accounts of perception, conception, memory and moral and aesthetic judgment. He stoutly defends our status as continuing responsible agents, claiming that the only genuine causality is agency and that although natural regularities are held to be causes they cannot be full-blooded causes. Continuing persons are not reducible to material entities subject to laws of nature, (pace Priestley); nor does the proper study of responsible agents belong within natural philosophy. Morals may be adequately systematized on a human rights basis according to which private property is not sacrosanct, once moral judgment is recognised to be based on first principles of morals. Judgments of beauty likewise rest on a body of first principles, even though Reid readily allows that there are no properties that all beautiful objects must have in common.


Author(s):  
Jean Abbott

Abstract The ‘sensuous’ imagery of Richard Rolle’s Incendium Amoris is typically regarded as spiritual metaphor—albeit a very material-seeming one. However, the trio of spiritual sensations Rolle explores at length in this work (fervor, dulcor, and canor) has a more precise, systematic connection with the physical world via the theory of the four terrestrial elements—a cornerstone of medieval natural philosophy. Through his imagery and descriptions, as well as his own reported actions and reactions, Rolle sets up the burning of fervor as a spiritual mirror of physical fire, the breath of canor as air, and the flowing sweetness of dulcor as water. The fourth member of this elemental system, representing earth, is the human soul that experiences one or more of the other elements of God’s love. The resemblance between these spiritual and physical elements is so pervasive, and Incendium exploits it so effectively, that Rolle must carefully and repeatedly specify that they are not, in fact, the same thing. Describing the ineffable through these concrete natural phenomena offers a useful framework for understanding a complex spiritual concept; however, through the idea that elements can transform into one another, it also offers a way of conceptualizing how the devout soul may be fully enveloped in God’s elemental love.


Phronesis ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 315-334 ◽  
Author(s):  

AbstractThere is a well-known tension in Plotinus' thought regarding the location of the intelligible region. He appears to make three mutually incompatible claims about it: (1) it is everywhere; (2) it is nowhere; and (3) it borders on the heavens, where the third claim is associated with Plotinus' affection for cosmic religion. Traditionally, although scholars have found a reasonable way to make sense of the compatibility of the first two claims, they have sought to relieve the tension generated by (3) by both downplaying the importance of cosmic religion to Plotinus and reinterpreting his spatial language metaphorically. In this paper I argue that both of these maneuvers are unsatisfactory. Rather, it is possible to reconcile Plotinus' metaphysics with the world-view of cosmic religion (CR world-view), i.e., to retain the spatial sense of Plotinus' language without making his metaphysics incoherent.In the first part of this paper, I show that cosmic religion is not just an awkward appendage to Plotinus' metaphysics. After explaining what cosmic religion involves, I argue that the CR world-view is in fact central to his natural philosophy. Then, I turn to the problem of the compatibility between cosmic religion and Plotinus' thought. By carefully considering how Aristotle's Prime Mover is present to his universe, I show how we can make claims (2) and (3) compatible for Plotinus. Then, I argue that Plotinus' own account of the omnipresence of soul and its powers' actualizations in particular locations provides a parallel to the problem of the compatibility between (1) and (3), and further that these two accounts can be combined to resolve completely the tension between the CR world-view and Plotinus' metaphysics. In the final section, I discuss the implications this has for our understanding of the soul's ascent and descent.


Classics ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenny Bryan

The poet-philosopher Xenophanes of Colophon (in Ionia, now western Turkey) was active in the 6th to 5th centuries bce. While his precise dates are uncertain, it is plausible that he was born toward the beginning of the 6th century (perhaps around 570–560 bce), and he himself claimed to have lived into his nineties. The biographical tradition suggests that he traveled widely, and he is often associated with Elea, in southern Italy. On some accounts, he is named as the founder of the Eleatic school of philosophy, and even as the teacher of its most prominent figure, Parmenides of Elea, but neither claim is certain. Xenophanes composed verse in both hexameter and elegiac meter, but only some forty-five fragments of his work survive. These fragments are preserved as quotations in the works of various later authors, and our understanding of Xenophanes relies on reading these in combination with the ancient testimonia (accounts given by other authors) on his life and thought. The elegiac fragments indicate a concern with proper behavior within the civic and sympotic contexts. Some of his hexameter fragments are critical, particularly of contemporary theology, and these came to be labelled Silloi (Satires). Xenophanes is often classed as part of the tradition of Ionian natural philosophy, and some of the fragments indicate an interest in providing rationalizing explanations of natural phenomena as well as a commitment to earth, water, and cloud as basic physical principles. Xenophanes is perhaps best known as a critic of contemporary anthropomorphic religion, which he appears to have rejected in favor of some sort of rational monotheism. His rejection of anthropomorphic religion is tied to criticism of Homer and Hesiod as its most prominent representatives. In addition to his interests in morality, theology, and natural philosophy, Xenophanes offers a couple of intriguing epistemological fragments, and there is a long-running debate over the nature and extent of his skepticism. Scholars have noted a possible connection between Xenophanes’ concerns with civic propriety and critique of the gods in poetry on ethical grounds and similar ideas found in Plato’s Republic. Xenophanes’ fragments do not present philosophical argument as such, tending instead toward assertion and critique. Scholarship on Xenophanes’ thought tends to rely on attempts to build up implications and connections within and between the fragments.


1981 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. Milton

TheIdea of explaining natural phenomena by appealing to laws of nature is one that is thoroughly familiar to the modern mind. This idea does not perhaps appear quite as natural as it did a century ago, when Engels proclaimed to the mourners at Marx's funeral that just as Darwin had discovered the law of development of organic nature so Marx had discovered the law of development of human history. Twentieth-century historians do not in general conceive their task as including the formulation of laws of history, and the discoveries of modern physics since Maxwell have for the most part been expressed in terms of principles and equations rather than laws. Nevertheless, despite these changes, we are still quite accustomed to thinking in terms of laws of nature; and just because it seems natural it is easy to assume that it is natural for human beings seeking to explain the phenomena of nature to do so by enquiring after the laws by which these phenomena are governed.


Vivarium ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 368-391
Author(s):  
Lodi Nauta

AbstractIn his Repastinatio. . . Lorenzo Valla launched a heavy attack on Aristotelian-scholastic thought. While most of this book is devoted to metaphysics, language and argumentation, Valla also incorporates chapters on the soul and natural philosophy. Using as criteria good Latin, common sense and common observation, he rejected much of standard Aristotelian teaching on the soul, replacing the hylopmorphic account of the scholastics by an Augustinian one. In this article his arguments on the soul's autonomy, nobility and independency from the body are studied and analysed. His critique of Aristotle's opinions on natural phenomena as being untrue to what we observe will also be briefly studied. His arguments do not show him always to be deep or consistent thinker, but the critical review of Aristotelian philosophy proceeds from some philosophically interesting assumptions. Moreover, from a broader historical perspective his undermining of Aristotle's authority may be regarded as a contribution to the final demise of the Aristotelian paradigm, even though the humanist critique was just one factor in this process.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document