Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T21:11:53.311Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Essence and Soul of Seventeenth-Century Scientific Revolution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Zev Bechler
Affiliation:
The Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and IdeasTel-Aviv University

Abstract

The inclusion of an item within a theory may be essential or accidental, and if the former then the explanation of its meaning and of its inclusion in the theory cannot be by accidental events and circumstances. Since all events and circumstances – be they social, political, religious, psychological, etc. – are accidental vis-à-vis the ideas they occasion, they cannot serve as explanation of these ideas. The only way to explain the ideas is by showing their essentiality to the theory rather than their importance to the people. Thus, the place of spirits and souls within seventeenth-century science is explained by Platonic ideology.

This demands a concept of nature which is thoroughly efficient causative, and a concept of explanation which is thoroughly informative. This means that theories must explain any given effect by a cause which is separable from it and is conceptually heterogeneous to it. Such a nature and such an explanation are inherently paradoxical and irrational, which explains the preponderance of these traits in seventeenth-century science as created by Kepler, through Galileo and Descartes to Newton.

The primary efficient-causal and explanatory agency is force, which is ontically distinct from matter and from the motion it causes in matter. Soul, spirit and active principle are mere variants of force. Thus, their presence in seventeenth-century science is explained only by their being conceptually essential to any Platonic philosophy of nature.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bechler, Zev (forthcoming). Newton's Physics and the Conceptual Structure of the Scientific Revolution.Google Scholar
Newton, Isaac 19591977. Correspondence, ed. Turnbull, H. W., Scott, J. D., Hall, A. R. and Tilling, L., 7 vols., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sabra, A. I., 1967. Theories of Light from Descartes to Newton, London: Oldbourne.Google Scholar