Language Reform and the Lens of Simile in Experimentalist Texts

2020 ◽  
pp. 40-73
Author(s):  
Erin Webster

This chapter sheds new light on the ‘plain style’ movement associated with the experimental philosophy of England’s Royal Society by demonstrating that our critical understanding of this movement as inherently anti-figurative has been hampered by an anachronistic understanding of how early modern Europeans understood figurative language to function. Drawing upon philosophical and experimentalist writings by Francis Bacon, Thomas Sprat, Robert Boyle, and Robert Hooke, this chapter shows that, rather than being against the use of metaphor and simile outright, experimentalist writers conceived of textual ‘similitudes’ as literary analogues to the mechanical technology of the lens. As such, they, like lenses, could serve both to clarify and to distort the objects they were used to describe and therefore must be carefully chosen and applied. The chapter concludes with an exploration of how readers responded to Hooke’s use of simile in his 1665 treatise on microscopy, Micrographia, by analyzing contemporaneous critiques of his work by Andrew Marvell, Samuel Butler, and Margaret Cavendish that target his literary style in addition—and relation—to his optical science.

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ειρήνη Γκουνταρούλη

Στη διατριβή αυτή μελετάται η διαμόρφωση της έννοιας της δύναμης στον αγγλικό φιλοσοφικό λόγο στα μέσα του 17ου αιώνα. Εν ολίγοις, η μελέτη εστιάζει το ενδιαφέρον στη σημασία της διερεύνησης τόσο του ιστορικού και του διανοητικού πλαισίου όσο και των εννοιολογικών συνθηκών της περιόδου. Μίας περιόδου όπου στο επίκεντρο του αγγλικού φιλοσοφικού λόγου έρχεται η συζήτηση σχετικά με το ποια είναι η κατάλληλη φιλοσοφική γλώσσα για να περιγράψει τη φύση. Βασικό σημείο της μελέτης αυτής, είναι η σφοδρή αντίθεση για το ζήτημα της κατάλληλης φιλοσοφικής γλώσσας, η οποία αναπτύσσεται μεταξύ του Thomas Hobbes και του John Wilkins, πρώιμου μέλους της Βασιλικής Εταιρείας. Η μελέτη αντλεί τα μεθοδολογικά και θεωρητικά της εργαλεία από το πεδίο της εννοιολογικής ιστορίας (ή ιστορίας των εννοιών). Υπό αυτό το πρίσμα, η έννοια της δύναμης μελετάται με βάση τα σχετικά σημασιολογικά πεδία τα οποία εντοπίζονται στα γλωσσικά περικείμενα αφενός του Hobbes και αφετέρου των πέντε μελών της πρώιμης Βασιλικής Εταιρείας, δηλαδή, του Wilkins, του Robert Hooke, του Robert Boyle, του Thomas Sprat και του Joseph Glanvill. Με άλλα λόγια, στη μελέτη αυτή η έννοια της δύναμης δεν προσεγγίζεται απλώς ως μία συμπύκνωση μαθηματικών σχέσεων και φυσικών φιλοσοφικών τεχνικών, αλλά ως η συμπύκνωση ενός πλήθους ιστορικών, διανοητικών και σημασιολογικών σχέσεων οι οποίες εντοπίζονται σε συγκεκριμένα γλωσσικά περικείμενα. Η μελέτη λαμβάνει υπόψη της την πληθώρα των ιστοριογραφικών ρευμάτων οι οποίες σχετίζονται με την νευτώνεια έννοια της δύναμης που δρα από απόσταση. Ωστόσο, πηγαίνει πέρα από αυτές εστιάζοντας στις υπο-διαμόρφωση εννοιολογικές δομές οι οποίες σχετίζονται με την έννοια της νευτώνειας δύναμης και οι οποίες συγκροτούνται βάσει της συζήτησης περί της κατάλληλης φιλοσοφικής γλώσσας. Οι συγχρονικά ασαφείς εννοιολογικές δομές συμπυκνώνονται στη, αλλά και συγκροτούν τη διαμάχη οι οποία βασίστηκε και διαμορφώθηκε από τα αντιθετικά φιλοσοφικά μοντέλα αφενός του Thomas Hobbes και αφετέρου των πρώιμων μελών της Royal Society. Σε αυτό το πλαίσιο, ο Νεύτωνας δεν θεωρείται πνευματικό επίγονος της Royal Society, αλλά της φιλοσοφικής διαμάχης μεταξύ του Hobbes και των πρώιμων μελών της Royal Society. Όπως ακριβώς και η νευτώνεια έννοια της δύναμης που δρα από απόσταση δεν είναι η συσσώρευση μαθηματικών και φυσικών φιλοσοφικών λεπτομερειών της εποχής, αλλά αναγνωρίζεται ως η συμπύκνωση μίας πληθώρας εννοιολογικών, πνευματικών, θρησκευτικών, πολιτικών και φυσικών φιλοσοφικών σχέσεων, οι οποίες θέτουν ένα συγκεκριμένο ορίζονται πιθανών εμπειριών και θεωριών.


Author(s):  
Margaret J. M. Ezell

An overview of the founding of the Royal Society of London and early members, including Robert Hooke, Isaac Newton, John Wilkins, Robert Boyle, and Henry Oldenburg, who first published the Philosophical Transactions. In addition to the creation and improvement of scientific instruments, including microscopes and telescopes, as recorded by their historian Thomas Sprat, the members of the Royal Society wished to create a language of science free from distorting images and metaphor and to base science on empirical experiments and direct observation. Although challenged by many for promoting an atheist understanding of the natural world, members such as Robert Boyle defended science as complementary with theology. The Society promoted publications and established networks of scientific correspondence to include members outside London and on the Continent.


1971 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 72-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert H. Kargon

“The Office of the sense shall be the only judge of the experiment, and … the experiment itself shall judge of the thing.”Francis Bacon, The Great InstaurationThe first history of the Royal Society of London, published in 1667, and the most recent full study of that scientific organization published three centuries later, agree on one important point: that Sir Francis Bacon was the intellectual progenitor of the body, that in the denigrating words of a contemporary critic the Society was “Bacon-faced.” The author of the former, Thomas Sprat, termed Bacon the “one great Man, who had the true Imagination of the whole extent of this Enterprise,” and in “whose Books there are every where scattered the best arguments that can be produced for the defence of Experimental Philosophy.” The author of the latter, Margery Purver, agrees that “Bacon was the great formative influence on the Society's concept of science.”Yet it must be conceded at once that Bacon's legacy was ambiguous. While the early Royal Society indeed was Bacon-faced, “it saw many faces of Bacon.” The period after the founding of the Society, the 1660's and 1670's, was one of contending philosophies and of a continuing effort to fashion clearer notions of what an experimental philosophy was to be like and what role experience was to play in scientific argument. Two of the more important and influential members of the Society who were actively engaged in this pursuit were Robert Boyle and Robert Hooke; these men were, and saw themselves, as disciples of the Lord Chancellor. It is my intention here to illustrate the differing approaches to the Baconian legacy of Boyle and of Hooke by focusing attention upon an interesting analogy, used by both, which may aid us in interpreting the conception of experiment in the works of these two founders of the experimental philosophy.


Author(s):  
Victor Nuovo

Although the vocation of Christian virtuoso was invented and named by Robert Boyle, Francis Bacon provided the archtype. A Christian virtuoso is an experimental natural philosopher who professes Christianity, who endeavors to unite empiricism and supernatural belief in an intellectual life. In his program for the renewal of the learning Bacon prescribed that the empirical study of nature be the basis of all the sciences, including not only the study of physical things, but of human society, and literature. He insisted that natural causes only be used to explain natural events and proposed not to mix theology with natural philosophy. This became a rule of the Royal Society of London, of which Boyle was a principal founder. Bacon’s rule also had a theological use, to preserve the purity and the divine authority of revelation. In the mind of the Christian virtuoso, nature and divine revelation were separate but complementary sources of truth.


Author(s):  
Erin Webster

The Curious Eye explores early modern debates over two related questions: what are the limits of human vision, and to what extent can these limits be overcome by technological enhancement? Today, in our everyday lives we rely on optical technology to provide us with information about visually remote spaces even as we question the efficacy and ethics of such pursuits. But the debates surrounding the subject of technologically mediated vision have their roots in a much older literary tradition in which the ability to see beyond the limits of natural human vision is associated with philosophical and spiritual insight as well as social and political control. The Curious Eye provides insight into the subject of optically mediated vision by returning to the literature of the seventeenth century, the historical moment in which human visual capacity in the West was first extended through the application of optical technologies to the eye. Bringing imaginative literary works by Francis Bacon, John Milton, Margaret Cavendish, and Aphra Behn together with optical and philosophical treatises by Johannes Kepler, René Descartes, Robert Hooke, Robert Boyle, and Isaac Newton, The Curious Eye explores the social and intellectual impact of the new optical technologies of the seventeenth century on its literature. At the same time, it demonstrates that social, political, and literary concerns are not peripheral to the optical science of the period but rather an integral part of it, the legacy of which we continue to experience.


2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 403-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Nate

Although Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle (1623-1673), did not belong to the scientific community which after 1660 formed itself around the Royal Society, several of the philosophical issues discussed there are reflected in her writings. Lengthy reflections on language and style which run through her philosophical worksprovide evidence that the linguistic and rhetorical debates of the early Royal Society also left their mark. The isolation which Cavendish faced as a woman writer obliged her to discuss problems of terminology and style even more intensively, thereby adhering to the rhetorical principle of perspicuity which Thomas Sprat demanded in his proposal for a scientific plain style. The influence of the New Science on Cavendish's work becomes obvious when her later writings are compared to her earlier ones where traces of a courtly and more elitist understanding of style can still be found. In this paper the development of Cavendish's stylistic attitudes is traced in several of her works, including her Utopian narrative The Blazing World (1666).


2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 48-50
Author(s):  
Michael W. Davidson

Robert Hooke was a brilliant British experimental and theoretical scientist who lived and worked in London during the seventeenth century. As a child, Hooke suffered from a devastating case of smallpox that left him physically and emotionally scarred for the rest of his life. He was born the son of a minister on July 18, 1635, at Freshwater, on the Isle of Wight. Hooke's father, John Hooke, took an active role in Robert's early education until he entered the Westminster School at the age of thirteen following his father's suicide. After graduating Westminster in 1648, Hooke first conducted an apprenticeship with artist Sir Peter Lely and then entered Oxford University where he met and studied under some of the greatest scientists in England. Hooke eventually became a paid assistant for Robert Boyle and helped develop a working air pump. He remained in Boyle's laboratory until 1662 when he was made curator of experiments for the Royal Society of London, a job that entailed demonstration of scientific equipment and experimental procedures during weekly meetings of the entire society.


When the Royal Society was founded in 1660, its initiators were far from being young men, as one would expect remembering that the long-lived John Wallis (1616-1703) gave its origins as lying in meetings begun as long before as 1645. Fifteen years after that date, most of its founders were, in 1660, well on in their 40s; even among the original Fellows of 1663 the youngest were Christopher Wren (38 in 1660), Robert Boyle (33) and William Croone (27), nor were the first recruits to the new, formal Society younger. Hence it is not surprising that the next 20 years saw the loss through death of the majority of them, nor that those who survived into the 1680s slowly withdrew from active participation in the meetings. Even Robert Hooke, only 27 when appointed Curator of Experiments in 1662, was by 1680 well on in years by 17th-century usage, and reasonably more interested in his various professional activities than anxious to labour at performing repetitions of experiments for the edification of fellow-members.


2007 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
MICHAEL HUNTER

This paper documents an important development in Robert Boyle's natural-philosophical method – his use from the 1660s onwards of ‘heads’ and ‘inquiries’ as a means of organizing his data, setting himself an agenda when studying a subject and soliciting information from others. Boyle acknowledged that he derived this approach from Francis Bacon, but he had not previously used it in his work, and the reason why it came to the fore when it did is not apparent from his printed and manuscript corpus. It is necessary to look beyond Boyle to his milieu for the cause, in this case to the influence on him of the Royal Society. Whereas the Royal Society in its early years is often seen as putting into practice a programme pioneered by Boyle, this crucial methodological change on his part seems rather to have been stimulated by the society's early concern for systematic data-collecting. In this connection, it is here shown that a key text, Boyle's influential ‘General Heads for a Natural History of a Country, Great or small’, published in Philosophical Transactions in 1666, represents more of a shared initiative between him and the society than has hitherto been appreciated.


Author(s):  
L. Jardine

On 25 August 1664 (almost exactly two years before the Great Fire of London) the curator of experiments for The Royal Society in London, Robert Hooke, wrote to the ‘father of modern chemistry’, Robert Boyle (for whom he did regular work as a paid designer and builder of experimental equipment), at his ‘elaboratory’ in Oxford, describing some scientific experiments he had carried out for The Royal Society a few days earlier.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document