scholarly journals II. The Bakerian Lecture. Observations on the theory of the motion and resistance of fluids; with a description of the construction of experiments, in order to obtain some fundamental principles

1795 ◽  
Vol 85 ◽  
pp. 24-45
Keyword(s):  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
Repulsive Force ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Power ◽  
Great Uncertainty ◽  
Elastic Fluids ◽  
Loss Of Motion

However satisfactory the general principles of motion may be, when applied to the action of bodies upon each other, in all those circumstances which are usually included in that branch of natural philosophy called mechanics, yet the application of the same principles in the investigation of the motions of fluids, and their actions upon other bodies, is subject to great uncertainty. That the different kinds of airs are constituted of particles endued with repulsive powers, is manifest from their expansion when the force with which they are compressed is removed. The particles being kept at a distance by their mutual repulsion, it is easy to conceive that they may move very freely amongst each other, and that this motion may take place in all directions, each particle exerting its repulsive power equally on all sides. Thus far we are acquainted with the constitution of these fluids; but with what absolute degree of facility the particles move, and how this may be affected under different degrees of compression, are circumstances of which we are totally ignorant. In respect to those fluids which are denominated liquids, we are still less acquainted with their nature. If we suppose their particles to be in contact, it is extremely difficult to conceive how they can move amongst each other with such extreme facility, and produce effects in directions opposite to the impressed force without any sensible loss of motion. To account for this, the particles are supposed to be perfectly smooth and spherical. If we were to admit this supposition, it would yet remain to be proved how this would solve all the phænomena, for it is by no means self-evident that it would. If the particles be not in contact, they must be kept at a distance by some repulsive power. But it is manifest that these particles attract each other, from the drops of all perfect liquids affecting to form themselves into spheres. We must therefore admit in this case both powers, and that where one power ends the other begins, agreeable to Sir Isaac Newton's idea of what takes place not only in respect to the constituent particles of bodies, but to the bodies themselves. The incompressibility of liquids (for I know no decisive experiments which have proved them to be compressible) seems most to favour the former supposition, unless we admit, in the latter hypothesis, that the repulsive force is greater than any human power which can be applied. The expansion of water by heat, and the possibility of actually converting it into two permanently elastic fluids, according to some late experiments, seem to prove that a repulsive power exists between the particles; for it is hard to conceive that heat can actually create any such new powers, or that it can of itself produce any such effects. All these uncertainties respecting the constitution of fluids must render the conclusions deduced from any theory subject to considerable errors, except that which is founded upon such experiments as include in them the consequences of all those principles which are liable to any degree of uncertainty.

Hugh of St Victor, Dominicus Gundissalinus and the Place of the Mechanical Arts in Medieval Architectures of Knowledge

2021 ◽  
Vol 153 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-318
Author(s):  
Alexander Fidora ◽  
Nicola Polloni
Keyword(s):  
Middle Ages ◽  
Thirteenth Century ◽  
Liberal Arts ◽  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
Natural Sciences ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Knowledge ◽  
The Arts ◽  
The One ◽  
Mechanical Arts

This contribution engages with the problematic position of the mechanical arts within medieval systems of knowledge. Superseding the secondary position assigned to the mechanical arts in the Early Middle Ages, the solutions proposed by Hugh of St Victor and Gundissalinus were highly influential during the thirteenth century. While Hugh’s integration of the mechanical arts into his system of knowledge betrays their still ancillary position as regards consideration of the liberal arts, Gundissalinus’s theory proposes two main novelties. On the one hand, he sets the mechanical arts alongside alchemy and the arts of prognostication and magic. On the other, however, using the theory put forward by Avicenna, he subordinates these “natural sciences” to natural philosophy itself, thereby establishing a broader architecture of knowledge hierarchically ordered. Our contribution examines the implications of such developments and their reception afforded at Paris during the thirteenth century, emphasising the relevance that the solutions offered by Gundissalinus enjoyed in terms of the ensuing discussions concerning the structure of human knowledge.

Interroga virtutes naturales: Nature in Giles of Rome’s On Ecclesiastical Power

Vivarium ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 22-50
Author(s):  
Peter Adamson
Keyword(s):  
Political Thought ◽  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
Human Life ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Political ◽  
Ability To Work ◽  
Christian Community ◽  
Marsilius Of Padua

AbstractGiles of Rome’s On Ecclesiastical Power (De ecclesiastica potestate), a polemical work arguing for the political supremacy of the pope, claims that the papacy holds a ‘plenitude of power’ and has direct or indirect authority over all aspects of human life. This paper shows how Giles uses themes from natural philosophy in developing his argument. He compares cosmic and human ordering and draws an analogy between the relations of soul to body and of Church to state. He also understands the pope’s power to be ‘universal’ in nature, another idea taken from Aristotelian physics. Further, Giles views the pope’s right to intervene arbitrarily in the affairs of the Christian community as mirroring God’s ability to work miracles. We thus see that Giles, no less than intellectuals on the other side of this debate such as Dante and Marsilius of Padua, believed that Aristotelian natural philosophy could be enlisted in the service of political thought.

The Epistemological Foundations of Natural Philosophy

Philosophy ◽  
1946 ◽  
Vol 21 (78) ◽  
pp. 5-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. J. Whitrow
Keyword(s):  
Natural Law ◽  
Scientific Method ◽  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
External World ◽  
The Other ◽  
Philosophical Discussion ◽  
Metaphysical Necessity ◽  
Basic Assumptions ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
History Of

The history of Natural Philosophy is dominated by a paradox; broadly speaking, a vast increase in its range of application to the external world has been accompanied by a sweeping simplification in its basic assumptions. From the standpoint of Empiricism this dual development appears utterly mysterious. On the other hand, Rationalism, which seeks to demonstrate the metaphysical necessity of natural law, and hence might throw light on this development, has been generally discredited, particularly by men of science. It is not surprising, therefore, that philosophical discussion of scientific method has become a Babel of confusing tongues.

Philosophy and Common Sense

Philosophy ◽  
1988 ◽  
Vol 63 (244) ◽  
pp. 161-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Common Sense ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
The Other ◽  
Jerry Fodor ◽  
Rational Acceptability ◽  
Three Stages ◽  
The One ◽  
The Relationship

This paper raises once more the question of the relationship between philosophy on the one hand and common sense on the other. More particularly, it is concerned with the role which common sense can play in passing judgment on the rational acceptability (or otherwise) of large-scale hypotheses in natural philosophy and the cosmological part of metaphysics. There are, as I see it, three stages through which the relationship has passed in the course of the twentieth century. There is the era of G. E. Moore, the Quine–Feyerabend period, and now a new and modest vindication of common sense is emerging in the work of Jerry Fodor.

scholarly journals A Note on Cleanthes and Early Stoic Cosmogony

Mnemosyne ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Benjamin Harriman
Keyword(s):  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
Early Period ◽  
The Other ◽  
Middle Ground ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Controversial Area

Abstract Our primary evidence for the contribution of Cleanthes, the second Stoic scholarch, to the school’s distinctive theory of cyclical ekpyrosis (conflagration) is limited to a single difficult passage found in Stobaeus attributed to Arius Didymus. Interpretations of this text have largely proceeded by emendation (von Arnim, Meerwaldt) or claims of misconstrual or misunderstanding (Hahm). In recent studies, Salles and Hensley have taken the passage at face value and reconstructed opposed interpretations of Cleanthes’ position. The former suggests that it differs significantly from that of Zeno and Chrysippus. Both the sequence of elemental transformation and its scope are said to be challenged by Cleanthes, suggesting cosmogony was a deeply controversial area in the early Stoa. I resist this interpretation of the evidence while also attempting to read the text without textual correction. Hensley, on the other hand, finds all three to be in strict harmony. Here I advocate for a middle ground where Cleanthes is closer to the positions of both Zeno and Chrysippus, but I also find room for his development of Stoic cosmogony as composed of a series of discrete stages radiating outwards from the middle. We are left with a clearer, more nuanced picture of how Stoic natural philosophy develops in its early period.

scholarly journals R. DESCARTES IR I. NEWTONAS: GAMTOS FILOSOFIJOS SISTEMŲ PANAŠUMAI IR SKIRTUMAI (LAIKO IR ERDVĖS ASPEKTAI)

Problemos ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas Čiurlionis
Keyword(s):  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
Special Theory ◽  
The Other ◽  
Absolute Space ◽  
Newtonian Mechanics ◽  
Space And Time ◽  
History Of ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Laws Of Motion ◽  
In The Beginning

Erdvės ir laiko sampratų istorijoje I. Newtonas yra neabejotinai viena svarbiausių figūrų. Absoliučios erdvės ir laiko idėjos ilgą laiką buvo plačiai pripažintos ir realiai paneigtos tik XX a. pradžioje, atsiradus specialiajai reliatyvumo teorijai. Tačiau niutoniškajai mechanikai įsitvirtinti reikėjo nukonkuruoti R. Descartes’o gamtamokslines pažiūras. Kita vertus, ar gali būti, kad abiejų filosofų pažiūros yra ne tiek prieštaraujančios, kiek panašios? Ar gali būti, kad I. Newtonas pasinaudojo R. Descartes’o idėjomis, konstruodamas savo garsiuosius judėjimo dėsnius, kuriais konstatavo laiko ir erdvės absoliutumą? Šie probleminiai klausimai yra nagrinėjami straipsnyje.Reikšminiai žodžiai: erdvė, laikas, judėjimo dėsniai, reliatyvumas. R. DESCARTES AND I. NEWTON: SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEIR SYSTEMS OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHYJonas Čiurlionis Summary Throughout the history of undertanding space and time, I. Newton is undoubtedly one of the most important figures. His ideas of absolute space and time were widely accepted and refused only in the beginning of the 20th century with the rise of special theory of reliativity. However, in order to be recognized, Newtonian mechanics had to win the competition against Cartesian natural philosophy. On the other hand, can it be that views of both philosophers are more similar than contradictory? Can it be that I. Newton used the ideas of R. Descartes while constructing his famous laws of motion – the foundation for the absolute space and time? These and similar problematic questions are discussed in the article.Keywords: space, time, laws of motion, relativity.

scholarly journals Towards the Other Side of Complexity: Values and Decisions in a Time of Uncertainty

2021 ◽  
pp. 211-214
Author(s):  
Marcelo Knobel
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
The Other ◽  
Highly Qualified ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Health Consequences ◽  
Health Measures ◽  
Great Uncertainty ◽  
Short Time ◽  
First Time

AbstractHumanity is experiencing a moment of great uncertainty. This is not the first time a pandemic threatens the lives of millions of people. However, the speed with which governments and scientists are reacting to events is unprecedented. In an incredibly short time after the discovery of the virus, public health measures were implemented, and the development of defences in the form of public policies, medical therapies, and vaccines began. At this precarious moment, when the proliferation of information (and misinformation) from a variety of sources contribute to the spread of panic, universities and the scientific community emerge as the best and most reliable sources of information. It is only highly qualified specialists who can truly address the pandemic and its terrible economic, political, and public health consequences.

Early Modern Philosophy, 1600-1750

Philosophy ◽  
2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonia LoLordo
Keyword(s):  
Modern Philosophy ◽  
Early Modern ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
18Th Century ◽  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
The Other ◽  
Early Modern Philosophy ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Academic Philosophy

In 21st century academic philosophy, “early modern philosophy” refers to the study of texts written in a specific time and place, and understood as works of philosophy in that context. The time is, roughly, the 17th century and the first half of the 18th century. This article is limited to philosophers who published or wrote most of their major works between 1600 and 1750, thus including Hume and Condillac but omitting near-contemporaries like Rousseau. The place is often described as Western Europe, but this is a bit misleading: with very few exceptions, the philosophers discussed here were from France, Holland, or what is now the United Kingdom. The traditional canon of Early Modern philosophers was very small: Locke, Berkeley, and Hume on one side of the English Channel; Descartes, Leibniz, and Spinoza on the other. In the last decades of the 20th century and first decades of the 21st century, the canon was expanded significantly. Two main factors drove the expansion of the canon. One was increased attention to works of what was then called natural philosophy, like Newton’s Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica. The other was increased attention to the work of women. This bibliography aims to capture some of this expansion, but still, hundreds of other works could have been included—and more will be as time goes on.

Forces of Production and Relations of Production

2018 ◽  
pp. 76-96
Author(s):  
David Laibman
Keyword(s):  
Social Evolution ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Power ◽  
Historical Materialist ◽  
Scientific Analysis ◽  
Materialist Theory ◽  
The One ◽  
And Control ◽  
Theoretical Foundations

Marx and Engels based the movement for socialism and communism on a scientific analysis of social evolution rather than on ahistorical moral longings. This, however, requires replacement of vague evocative formulations by rigorous theoretical foundations. Two recent proposals for grounding the theory of the forces and relations of production—“intentional primacy” and “competitive primacy”—provide elements for this project but fail to drive it home. A proposed third approach, “social‒functional primacy,” focuses on the correspondence between advancing human power over nature, on the one hand, and the changing requirements for reproducible systems of exploitation—incentive, coercion, and control—on the other. A core evolutionary ladder of modes of production is identified as the basis for reconstructing the immense complexity of actual history, thus overcoming the dichotomy between “hard” and “soft” approaches to historical materialist theory.

Grosseteste, Robert (c.1170–1253)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott MacDonald
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
The Other ◽  
Posterior Analytics ◽  
Intellectual Traditions ◽  
Correct Account ◽  
Aristotle's Ethics ◽  
The One ◽  
European Thought ◽  
Pseudo Dionysius

Grosseteste’s thought is representative of the conflicting currents in the intellectual climate of Europe in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries. On the one hand, his commitment to acquiring, understanding and making accessible to his Latin contemporaries the texts and ideas of newly discovered Arabic and Greek intellectual traditions places him in the vanguard of a sweeping movement transforming European thought during his lifetime. His work in science and natural philosophy, for example, is inspired by material newly translated from Arabic sources and by the new Aristotelian natural philosophy, especially the Physics, On the Heavens and Posterior Analytics (Aristotle’s treatise on the nature of scientific knowledge). Similarly, in his work in metaphysics, ethics and theology Grosseteste turns to ancient sources previously unknown (or incompletely known) to Western thinkers, prominent among which are Aristotle’s Ethics and the writings of Pseudo-Dionysius. His work as a translator of and commentator on Aristotle and Pseudo-Dionysius places Grosseteste among the pioneers in the assimilation of these important strands of the Greek intellectual heritage into the mainstream of European thought. On the other hand, Grosseteste’s views are in significant respects conservative. His greatest debt is to Augustine, and his most original ideas – such as his view that light is a fundamental constituent of all corporeal reality – are extensions of recognizably Augustinian themes. Moreover, although his work on Aristotle is groundbreaking, his approach is judicious and measured, lacking any hint of the crusader’s zeal that marks the work of the later radical Aristotelians. In general his practice conforms to the traditional Neoplatonist line, viewing Aristotle as a guide to logic and natural philosophy while turning to Platonism – in Grosseteste’s case, Augustinian and Pseudo-Dionysian Platonism – for the correct account of the loftier matters of metaphysics and theology.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document