DOCSLIB.ORG

'S Gravesande's and Van Musschenbroek's Appropriation Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
'S Gravesande's and Van Musschenbroek's Appropriation Of chapter 8 ’s Gravesande’s and Van Musschenbroek’s Appropriation of Newton’s Methodological Ideas Steffen Ducheyne 1 Introduction Willem Jacob ’s Gravesande (1688–1742) and Petrus van Musschenbroek (1692–1761) are rightfully considered as important trailblazers in the diffu- sion of Newtonianism on the Continent.1 They helped to establish teach- ing of Newton’s natural philosophy within the university curriculum and the textbooks which they wrote were of vital importance in its spread and popularization.2 On the face of it, there are good reasons for portraying ’s Gravesande and van Musschenbroek as “Newtonians”. Both ’s Gravesande and van Musschenbroek spent time in England where they became acquainted † Parts of this chapter was presented at the international conference “The Reception of Newton” (Edward Worth Library, Dublin, 12–13 July 2012). The author is indebted to its au- dience for useful suggestions. In this chapter I draw extensively on material from Steffen Ducheyne, “W.J. ’s Gravesande’s Appropriation of Newt on’s Natural Philosophy, Part i: Episte- mological and Theological issues”, Centaurus, 56(1) (2014), 31–55; id., “W.J. ’s Gravesande’s Ap- propriation of Newton’s Natural Philosophy, Part ii: Methodological Issues”, Centaurus, 56 (2) (2014), 97–120; id., “Petrus van Musschenbroek and Newton’s ‘vera stabilisque Philosophandi methodus’”, Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, 38 (4) (2015), 279–304; and id., “Petrus van Musschenbroek on the scope of physica and its place in philosophy”, Asclepio, Revista de his- toria de la medicina y de la ciencia, 68, no. 1 (2016) article no 123. 1 John Gascoigne, “Ideas of Nature”, in Roy Porter (ed.), The Cambridge History of Science, Vol- ume 4: Eighteenth-Century Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 285–304; 297–299; Edward G. Ruestow, Physics at Seventeenth and Eighteenth-Century Leiden: Philoso- phy and the New Science in the University (International Archives of the History of Ideas se- ries, vol. 11 The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1973), Chapter 7; and Pierre Brunet, Les physiciens Hollandais et la méthode expérimentale en France au XVIIIe siècle (Paris: Albert Blanchard, 1926), Chapter 1. 2 See, for instance, Cornelis de Pater, “The Textbooks of ’s Gravesande and van Musschenbroek in Italy”, in C.S. Maffioli and L.C. Palm (eds.), Italian Scientists in the Low Countries in the 17th and 18th Centuries (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1989), 231–241 and Brunet, Les physiciens Hollandais, Chapter 2. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���7 | doi �0.��63/9789004336650_009 <UN> Newton’s Methododological Ideas 193 with Newton, his natural philosophy, and his disciples. In 1715 ’s Gravesande was secretary of a Dutch embassy which was sent to England to honour the coronation of George i and to negotiate about the barrier towns.3 During his stay, he was introduced to England’s leading natural philosophers: Isaac New- ton (1642–1727), who was president of the Royal Society at the time, the Royal Society’s curator of experiments, J.T. Desaguliers (1683–1744), and the Savillian Professor of Astronomy at Oxford, John Keill (1671–1721). In June 1715, ’s Graves- ande was elected Fellow of the Royal Society and during his stay in England he was won over by the Newtonian cause, the story goes. Shortly after his return, in 1717, he became professor of mathematics and astronomy at the University of Leiden, where he taught Newton’s natural philosophy until his death. His magnum opus carried the telling title Physices elementa mathematica experi- mentis confirmata, sive introductio ad philosophiam Newtoniam (first edition: 1720–1721; second edition: 1725; third edition: 1742).4 His counterpart, Van Musschenbroek, descended from a family of instru- ment makers, had obtained his doctoral degree in medicine from the University of Leiden in 1715, before receiving appointments at the University of Duisberg (1719–1723), where he obtained a doctoral degree in philosophy in 1719, and at the University of Utrecht (1723–1739), where he was professor of philosophy and mathematics and from 1732 professor of astronomy as well.5 In 1717 van Musschenbroek had, like ’s Gravesande before him, travelled to London to at- tend Desaguliers’ lectures on experimental philosophy and had met Newton. During his stay in England he came to accept the basics of Newton’s natural philosophy and the theory of universal gravitation. By 1740 he was professor of 3 Jean-Nicolas-Sébastien Allamand (ed.), Oeuvres philosophiques et mathématiques de Mr.G.J. ’s Gravesande 2 vols (Amsterdam: Marc Michel Rey, 1774 [1744]), I, xxi–xxii. 4 Willem Jacob ’s Gravesande, Mathematical Elements of Natural Philosophy, Confirm’d by Experiments: Or, an Introduction to Sir Isaac Newton’s Philosophy, tr. J.T. Desaguliers, 2 vols; (6th edn., London: Printed for T. Longman e.a., 1747 [1720–1721]) and id., Physices elementa mathematica experimentis confirmata, sive introductio ad philosophiam Newtoniam, 2 vols (3rd edn. Leiden: Johann Arnold Langerak, Johann and Hermann Verbeek, 1742 [1720–1721]). I will rely on the above editions throughout this essay. 5 On the cooperation between Petrus van Musschenbroek’s older brother Jan and ’s Graves- ande, see Anne C. van Helden, “Theory and Practice in Air-Pump Construction: The Coopera- tion between Willem Jacob ’s Gravesande and Jan van Musschenbroek”, Annals of Science, 51 (5) (1994), 477–495. For van Musschenbroek’s biographical details I have relied on Cornelis de Pater, “Petrus van Musschenbroek (1692–1761), Een newtoniaans natuuronderzoeker”, Ph.D. diss. (Utrecht University, 1979), 24–28. More information about links between Newtonian- ism and the practical tradition of Dutch philosophy may be found in Gerhard Wiesenfeldt’s paper in this collection. <UN>.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Newton.Indd | Sander Pinkse Boekproductie | 16-11-12 / 14:45 | Pag
    omslag Newton.indd | Sander Pinkse Boekproductie | 16-11-12 / 14:45 | Pag. 1 e Dutch Republic proved ‘A new light on several to be extremely receptive to major gures involved in the groundbreaking ideas of Newton Isaac Newton (–). the reception of Newton’s Dutch scholars such as Willem work.’ and the Netherlands Jacob ’s Gravesande and Petrus Prof. Bert Theunissen, Newton the Netherlands and van Musschenbroek played a Utrecht University crucial role in the adaption and How Isaac Newton was Fashioned dissemination of Newton’s work, ‘is book provides an in the Dutch Republic not only in the Netherlands important contribution to but also in the rest of Europe. EDITED BY ERIC JORINK In the course of the eighteenth the study of the European AND AD MAAS century, Newton’s ideas (in Enlightenment with new dierent guises and interpre- insights in the circulation tations) became a veritable hype in Dutch society. In Newton of knowledge.’ and the Netherlands Newton’s Prof. Frans van Lunteren, sudden success is analyzed in Leiden University great depth and put into a new perspective. Ad Maas is curator at the Museum Boerhaave, Leiden, the Netherlands. Eric Jorink is researcher at the Huygens Institute for Netherlands History (Royal Dutch Academy of Arts and Sciences). / www.lup.nl LUP Newton and the Netherlands.indd | Sander Pinkse Boekproductie | 16-11-12 / 16:47 | Pag. 1 Newton and the Netherlands Newton and the Netherlands.indd | Sander Pinkse Boekproductie | 16-11-12 / 16:47 | Pag. 2 Newton and the Netherlands.indd | Sander Pinkse Boekproductie | 16-11-12 / 16:47 | Pag.
    [Show full text]
  • The Newton-Leibniz Controversy Over the Invention of the Calculus
    The Newton-Leibniz controversy over the invention of the calculus S.Subramanya Sastry 1 Introduction Perhaps one the most infamous controversies in the history of science is the one between Newton and Leibniz over the invention of the infinitesimal calculus. During the 17th century, debates between philosophers over priority issues were dime-a-dozen. Inspite of the fact that priority disputes between scientists were ¡ common, many contemporaries of Newton and Leibniz found the quarrel between these two shocking. Probably, what set this particular case apart from the rest was the stature of the men involved, the significance of the work that was in contention, the length of time through which the controversy extended, and the sheer intensity of the dispute. Newton and Leibniz were at war in the later parts of their lives over a number of issues. Though the dispute was sparked off by the issue of priority over the invention of the calculus, the matter was made worse by the fact that they did not see eye to eye on the matter of the natural philosophy of the world. Newton’s action-at-a-distance theory of gravitation was viewed as a reversion to the times of occultism by Leibniz and many other mechanical philosophers of this era. This intermingling of philosophical issues with the priority issues over the invention of the calculus worsened the nature of the dispute. One of the reasons why the dispute assumed such alarming proportions and why both Newton and Leibniz were anxious to be considered the inventors of the calculus was because of the prevailing 17th century conventions about priority and attitude towards plagiarism.
    [Show full text]
  • Newton's Mathematical Physics
    Isaac Newton A new era in science Waseda University, SILS, Introduction to History and Philosophy of Science LE201, History and Philosophy of Science Newton . Newton’s Legacy Newton brought to a close the astronomical revolution begun by Copernicus. He combined the dynamic research of Galileo with the astronomical work of Kepler. He produced an entirely new cosmology and a new way of thinking about the world, based on the interaction between matter and mathematically determinate forces. He joined the mathematical and experimental methods: the hypothetico-deductive method. His work became the model for rational mechanics as it was later practiced by mathematicians, particularly during the Enlightenment. LE201, History and Philosophy of Science Newton . William Blake’s Newton (1795) LE201, History and Philosophy of Science Newton LE201, History and Philosophy of Science Newton . Newton’s De Motu coporum in gyrum Edmond Halley (of the comet) visited Cambridge in 1684 and 1 talked with Newton about inverse-square forces (F 9 d2 ). Newton stated that he has already shown that inverse-square force implied an ellipse, but could not find the documents. Later he rewrote this into a short document called De Motu coporum in gyrum, and sent it to Halley. Halley was excited and asked for a full treatment of the subject. Two years later Newton sent Book I of The Mathematical Principals of Natural Philosophy (Principia). Key Point The goal of this project was to derive the orbits of bodies from a simpler set of assumptions about motion. That is, it sought to explain Kepler’s Laws with a simpler set of laws.
    [Show full text]
  • Reposs #19: Newtonianism in the Scandinavian Countries, 1690–1790
    RePoSS: Research Publications on Science Studies RePoSS #19: Newtonianism in the Scandinavian Countries, 1690–1790 Helge Kragh August 2012 Centre for Science Studies, University of Aarhus, Denmark Research group: History and philosophy of science Please cite this work as: Helge Kragh (Aug. 2012). Newtonianism in the Scandinavian Countries, 1690–1790. RePoSS: Research Publications on Sci- ence Studies 19. Aarhus: Centre for Science Studies, University of Aarhus. url: http://www.css.au.dk/reposs. Copyright c Helge Kragh, 2012 1 Newtonianism in the Scandinavian Countries, 1690-1790 HELGE KRAGH 1 Introduction In the present context, the Scandinavian countries refer to two national or administrative units, the one being Denmark and the other Sweden. In the period here considered, largely the century from 1690 to 1790, ‘Denmark’ means really Denmark-Norway, for until 1814 Norway was part of the double monarchy ruled by the king and his government in Copenhagen. It should also be kept in mind that parts of what is today Germany, namely Schleswig-Holstein, belonged to the kingdom. However, as far as language and culture were concerned, these parts of southern Denmark were more German than Danish, and they played no important role in the scientific life of the kingdom. Sweden covered a much larger geographical area than it does today. The country had expanded greatly during the seventeenth century, when not only Finland but also parts of the Baltic area and northern Germany came under Swedish rule. About 1720, after the Great Northern War, Sweden lost most of its possessions, but the major part of Finland remained as part of the country until Centre for Science Studies, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Aarhus University, Denmark.
    [Show full text]
  • Newtonianism and the Physics of Du Châtelet's Institutions De Physique
    To appear in: Collected Wisdom of the Early Modern Scholar: Essays in Honor of Mordechai Feingold, eds. Anna Marie Roos and Gideon Manning. Newtonianism and the physics of Du Châtelet’s Institutions de physique Marius Stan This paper is about two things that cross paths. One is the many senses of the category ‘Newtonian,’ and their uses for exegesis. The other is the phys- ics that Emilie du Châtelet grounded philosophically around 1740 in her book, Institutions de physique. I offer it as a tribute to Moti Feingold’s mag- isterial work on how the century after Newton responded to his science. I begin with some context. Many have described Institutions as a work of Leibnizian foundations for Newtonian science. An inspiring image, no doubt, but is it accurate? I argue here that it is not: little physics in her book is really Newtonian. Most of her physics is from figures before Newton; and even when she includes his results, du Châtelet filters them through demonstrably un-Newtonian ideas. So, we must abandon the conventional wisdom about her science.1 1 In the 20th century, the dominant view became that Institutions is concerned with “merg- ing Leibnizianism and Newtonianism”; is a “marriage between Leibnizian metaphysics and Newtonian science”; is an “introduction to Newtonian physics” attesting du Châtelet’s conversion to “Leibnizian metaphysics”; mediates “between Leibniz and Newton”; is a landmark document in the “history of French Newtonianism” and yet “framed according to Leibnizian principles.” Allegedly it is a “fusion of Newton, Descartes, and Leibniz,” and it synthesizes “Newtonian physics” and “Leibnizian metaphysics.” So pervasive is it that it has seeped into the broader consciousness of Anglophone academia.
    [Show full text]
  • KAREN THOMSON CATALOGUE 103 UNIQUE OR RARE with A
    KAREN THOMSON CATALOGUE 103 UNIQUE OR RARE with a Newtonian section & a Jane Austen discovery KAREN THOMSON RARE BOOKS CATALOGUE 103 UNIQUE OR RARE With a Newtonian section (1-8), and a Jane Austen discovery (16) [email protected] NEWTONIANA William Jones’ copy [1] Thomas Rudd Practicall Geometry, in two parts: the first, shewing how to perform the foure species of Arithmeticke (viz: addition, substraction, multiplication, and division) together with reduction, and the rule of proportion in figures. The second, containing a hundred geometricall questions, with their solutions & demonstrations, some of them being performed arithmetically, and others geometrically, yet all without the help of algebra. Imprinted at London by J.G. for Robert Boydell, and are to be sold at his Shop in the Bulwarke neer the Tower, 1650 £1500 Small 4to. pp. [vii]+56+[iv]+139. Removed from a volume of tracts bound in the eighteenth century for the Macclesfield Library with characteristically cropped inscription, running titles, catchwords and page numbers, and shaving three words of the text on H4r. Ink smudge to second title page verso, manuscript algebraic solution on 2Q3 illustrated below, Macclesfield armorial blindstamp, clean and crisp. First edition, one of two issues published in the same year (the other spelling “Practical” in the title). William Jones (1675-1749) was employed by the second Earl of Macclesfield at Shirburn Castle as his mathematics instructor, and at his death left his pupil and patron the most valuable mathematical library in England, which included Newton manuscript material. Jones was an important promoter of Isaac Newton’s work, as well as being a friend: William Stukeley (see item 6), in the first biography of Newton, describes visiting him “sometime with Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Cotton Mather's Relationship to Science
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University English Theses Department of English 4-16-2008 Cotton Mather's Relationship to Science James Daniel Hudson Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/english_theses Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Hudson, James Daniel, "Cotton Mather's Relationship to Science." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2008. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/english_theses/33 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of English at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in English Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COTTON MATHER’S RELATIONSHIP TO SCIENCE by JAMES DANIEL HUDSON Under the Direction of Dr. Reiner Smolinski ABSTRACT The subject of this project is Cotton Mather’s relationship to science. As a minister, Mather’s desire to harmonize science with religion is an excellent medium for understanding the effects of the early Enlightenment upon traditional views of Scripture. Through “Biblia Americana” and The Christian Philosopher, I evaluate Mather’s effort to relate Newtonian science to the six creative days as recorded in Genesis 1. Chapter One evaluates Mather’s support for the scientific theories of Isaac Newton and his reception to natural philosophers who advocate Newton’s theories. Chapter Two highlights Mather’s treatment of the dominant cosmogonies preceding Isaac Newton. The Conclusion returns the reader to Mather’s principal occupation as a minister and the limits of science as informed by his theological mind. Through an exploration of Cotton Mather’s views on science, a more comprehensive understanding of this significant early American and the ideological assumptions shaping his place in American history is realized.
    [Show full text]
  • Science and Belief from the Copernicans to the Creationists and the Way Ahead
    Science and belief from the Copernicans to the Creationists and the way ahead Course Number: HIST/INDS 550 Institution: Regent College Instructors: Dr. David Livingstone and Dr. Mark Noll Course Description This course examines critical historical episodes in the interaction between Christianity and science from the sixteenth century to the present. A major goal is to show how deeply embedded in specific cultural situations are all “encounters” between Christianity and science. A second goal is to subvert the notion that talking about “creation” and “evolution” was or ever can be a simple matter. A third goal is to suggest Christian strategies for a more fruitful interchange between science and faith. From this course, students should take away both enriched historical understanding and better theological balance for approaching critical questions relating science and Christianity. Class Outline Mon, July 17: I. Introduction II. Telling the Story of Science and Christianity Tues, July 18: III. The Copernican "Revolution" IV. The Reformation and Science Wed, July 19: V. The Puritans and Science VI. Newton and the Mechanistic World Picture Thurs, July 20: VII. Enlightenment and the Human Sciences VIII. Enlightenment, Science, and Christianity in North America Fri, July 21: IX. Pre-Darwinian, Early-Victorian Science X. The 1830s as a crucial decade for science, theology, and society Mon, July 24: XI. Darwin the man XII. Evolutionary Theories in the Late 19th Century Tues, July 25: XIII. Christian Scientists Encounter Evolution XIV. Theological Evaluations of Darwin and Darwinism Wed, July 26: XV. Creationism in the Context of American Religious History XVI. Interpreting the New Creationism Thurs, July 27: XVII.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Gods and Kings: Natural Philosophy and Politics in the Leibniz-Clarke Disputes Steven Shapin Isis, Vol. 72, No. 2. (Jun., 1981), Pp
    Of Gods and Kings: Natural Philosophy and Politics in the Leibniz-Clarke Disputes Steven Shapin Isis, Vol. 72, No. 2. (Jun., 1981), pp. 187-215. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0021-1753%28198106%2972%3A2%3C187%3AOGAKNP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-C Isis is currently published by The University of Chicago Press. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/ucpress.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. http://www.jstor.org Mon Aug 20 10:29:37 2007 Of Gods and Kings: Natural Philosophy and Politics in the Leibniz-Clarke Disputes By Steven Shapin* FTER TWO AND A HALF CENTURIES the Newton-Leibniz disputes A continue to inflame the passions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Self-Fashioning of French Newtonianism J
    Metascience DOI 10.1007/s11016-010-9511-3 BOOK REVIEW The self-fashioning of French Newtonianism J. B. Shank: The Newton Wars and the beginning of the French Enlightenment. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2008, xv+571pp, $55.00 HB Charles T. Wolfe • David Gilad Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010 J. B. Shank has written a major cultural history of Newtonianism in the French Enlightenment—or rather a study of how Newtonianism was constructed to serve the purposes of the ‘‘self-fashioning’’ of various key figures in the French Enlightenment. As straight history of ideas, it can be read as providing a French counterpart to works such as John Gascoigne’s masterful (1989) study of science and religion at Cambridge, or as a more detailed, more culturally and rhetorically sophisticated book-length extension of analyses such as Robert Schofield’s ‘‘taxonomy of eighteenth-century Newtonianisms’’ (Schofield 1978). But Shank is also interested in a different approach, a different form of analysis, which in fact challenges ‘‘the classic narrative produced by the Enlightenment philosophes’’ (21). He uses lots of language that harks back to the heyday of theory in the humanities— the book is ‘‘a critical genealogy of beginnings,’’ a ‘‘postmodern,’’ ‘‘post- Enlightenment’’ history of an event—but in fact very little of this really has an impact on the detailed analyses produced over the next four hundred and fifty pages. Brunet’s (1931) book on the introduction of Newton’s theories into France in the early eighteenth century,
    [Show full text]
  • Calculation and Controversy
    calculation and controversy The young Newton owed his greatest intellectual debt to the French mathematician and natural philosopher, René Descartes. He was influ- enced by both English and Continental commentators on Descartes’ work. Problems derived from the writings of the Oxford mathematician, John Wallis, also featured strongly in Newton’s development as a mathe- matician capable of handling infinite series and the complexities of calcula- tions involving curved lines. The ‘Waste Book’ that Newton used for much of his mathematical working in the 1660s demonstrates how quickly his talents surpassed those of most of his contemporaries. Nevertheless, the evolution of Newton’s thought was only possible through consideration of what his immediate predecessors had already achieved. Once Newton had become a public figure, however, he became increasingly concerned to ensure proper recognition for his own ideas. In the quarrels that resulted with mathematicians like Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) or Johann Bernoulli (1667–1748), Newton supervised his disciples in the reconstruction of the historical record of his discoveries. One of those followers was William Jones, tutor to the future Earl of Macclesfield, who acquired or copied many letters and papers relating to Newton’s early career. These formed the heart of the Macclesfield Collection, which has recently been purchased by Cambridge University Library. 31 rené descartes, Geometria ed. and trans. frans van schooten 2 parts (Amsterdam, 1659–61) 4o: -2 4, a-3t4, g-3g4; π2, -2 4, a-f4 Trinity* * College, Cambridge,* shelfmark* nq 16/203 Newton acquired this book ‘a little before Christmas’ 1664, having read an earlier edition of Descartes’ Geometry by van Schooten earlier in the year.
    [Show full text]
  • Adam Smith Real Newtonian
    6 Adam Smith Real Newtonian Leonidas Montes Joseph Schumpeter was not an admirer of Adam Smith. But in his monu- mental History of Economic Analysis he praises ‘the rudimentary equilibrium theory of chapter 7, by far the best piece of economic theory turned out by A. Smith’ (1954: 189), simply because it was a theoretical predecessor of Walras. While Isnard, Smith, Say and Ricardo ‘struggled or rather fumbled for it’, for Schumpeter it was Walras who made the ‘discovery’ of economic equilibrium, ‘the Magna Carta of economic theory’ (ibid.: 242). Since then, it has been generally accepted that Smith was a forerunner, if not the founder, of general economic equilibrium theory.1 While some consider Walras’s general economic equilibrium to be ‘the peak of neo- classical economics’ (Samuelson 1952: 61), nevertheless Adam Smith is widely seen as the ‘father of our science’. Moreover, the most famous (and most elusive) metaphor in the history of economic thought, the invisible hand, has been interpreted as ‘a poetic expression’ that confirms Smith as ‘a creator of general equilibrium theory’ (Arrow and Hahn 1971: 2). One way or another, microeconomics textbooks too readily link Smith’s invisi- ble hand with some sort of equilibrium.2 Although the interpretation of Smith as the father of general equilib- rium theory has already been challenged, this chapter contributes to this debate by interpreting Smith as a real Newtonian. Within this particular debate an intellectual appreciation of the eighteenth-century context, which was thoroughly pervaded by Newton’s enormous influence, has led to an assessment of Newton’s influence on Adam Smith.
    [Show full text]