Astronomy and Optics from Pliny to Descartes: Texts, Diagrams, and Conceptual Structures. Bruce S. EastwoodThe Arabs and the Stars: Texts and Traditions on the Fixed Stars, and Their Influence on Medieval Europe. Paul KunitzschStars, Minds, and Fate: Essays in Ancient and Medieval Cosmology. J. D. NorthThe Universal Frame: Historical Essays in Astronomy, Natural Philosophy, and Scientific Method. J. D. NorthAstronomy from Kepler to Newton: Historical Studies. Curtis Wilson

Isis ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 83 (2) ◽  
pp. 302-303
Author(s):  
Owen Gingerich
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Method ◽  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
Conceptual Structures ◽  
Medieval Europe ◽  
Medieval Cosmology

Bacon’s Metaphysical Method

2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 22-37
Author(s):  
Daniel Garber ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Method ◽  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
World View ◽  
Natural World ◽  
Scientific Domain ◽  
General Schema

In this paper, I would like to examine the method that Bacon proposes in Novum organum II.1-20 and illustrates with the example of the procedure for discovering the form of heat. One might think of a scientific method as a general schema for research into nature, one that can, in principle, be used independently of the particular conception of the natural world which one adopts, and independently of the particular scientific domain with which one is concerned. Indeed, Bacon himself suggested that as with logic, his method, or as he calls it there his “system of interpreting” is widely applicable to any domain, and not just to natural philosophy. [Novum organum I.127] Now, recent studies of Bacon have emphasized his own natural philosophical commitments, and the underlying conception of nature that runs through his writings. In my essay I argue that the method Bacon illustrates in Novum organum II is deeply connected to this underlying view of nature: far from being a neutral procedure for decoding nature, Bacon’s method is a tool for filling out the details of a natural philosophy built along the broad outlines of the Baconian world view.

scholarly journals Natural Philosophy and the Sciences: Challenging Science’s Tunnel Vision

Philosophies ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arran Gare
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Scientific Method ◽  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
Dialectical Thinking ◽  
Tunnel Vision ◽  
History Of ◽  
Natural Philosophers

Prior to the nineteenth century, those who are now regarded as scientists were referred to as natural philosophers. With empiricism, science was claimed to be a superior form of knowledge to philosophy, and natural philosophy was marginalized. This claim for science was challenged by defenders of natural philosophy, and this debate has continued up to the present. The vast majority of mainstream scientists are comfortable in the belief that through applying the scientific method, knowledge will continue to accumulate, and that claims to knowledge outside science apart from practical affairs should not be taken seriously. This is referred to as scientism. It is incumbent on those who defend natural philosophy against scientism not only to expose the illusions and incoherence of scientism, but to show that natural philosophers can make justifiable claims to advancing knowledge. By focusing on a recent characterization and defense of natural philosophy along with a reconstruction of the history of natural philosophy, showing the nature and role of Schelling’s conception of dialectical thinking, I will attempt to identify natural philosophy as a coherent tradition of thought and defend it as something different from science and as essential to it, and essential to the broader culture and to civilization.

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.

Contributions to the science of bridge-building in the nineteenth century by Henry Moseley, Hon. Ll.D., F. R. S. and William Pole, D.Mus., F. R. S

1976 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-179 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Scientific Method ◽  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
Applied Mechanics ◽  
Popular Belief ◽  
King's College ◽  
Bridge Building

The association of Moseley and Pole with the great railway engineers serves to show that, contrary to popular belief, leading bridge constructors relied heavily upon the scientific method as long ago as the early years of the nineteenth century. It also serves to show that the relevant scientific knowledge had reached a surprisingly advanced stage, even by modern standards: it has been a common fallacy in engineering circles that such knowledge became available only toward the end of that century. The Reverend Henry Moseley (F. R. S., 1839) lived from 1801 to 1872. He read mathematics at St John’s College, Cambridge and became professor of natural philosophy and astronomy at King’s College, London in 1831. He resigned his Chair in 1844 to become one of the first inspectors of schools, then in 1853 he was appointed Canon residentiary of Bristol Cathedral. Moseley became deeply interested in applied mechanics and seems to have been greatly influenced by the work of those outstanding Frenchmen Navier and Poncelet (1). In addition to teaching mechanical principles to students of the department of engineering and architecture at King’s College in the years 1840-1842, he contributed to the theory of arches as well as energy concepts in mechanics (2)(3). His celebrated book (4) published in 1843 drew attention to those matters, in addition to much of Navier’s work (5), which had already been available in France for some twenty years.

scholarly journals Introductory Reflections on Scholastic Economic Thought

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-92
Author(s):  
Giovanni Patriarca
Keyword(s):  
Middle Ages ◽  
Canon Law ◽  
Scientific Method ◽  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
Economic Thought ◽  
Economic Issues ◽  
Norms And Values ◽  
History Of ◽  
Shared Norms ◽  
The Ideal

This essay provides a general overview of the development of economic theories in Thirteenth and Fourteenth centuries in the light of the latest studies and offers new perspectives for future investigations. Scholasticism is a milestone in the history of Western philosophy as well as its contribution to scientific method and innovation. At the end of the Middle Ages, the ideal of shared norms and values clashes with the tensions of commercial transformation. In this historical framework – characterized not only by an unprecedented international trade and new financial institutions but also by a sort of proto-empiricism – the philosophical speculation tries to find a unitary “way of knowledge” between the legitimacy of individual interests and the primacy of general principles. This interdisciplinary effort is based on the innovative interpretation of theology, (natural) philosophy, Roman and Canon law such as local customary rules applied to the emergent economic issues.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document