DOCSLIB.ORG

Metaphors in the Construction of Theory: Ramus, Peirce and the American Mind Laurel Warren Trufant University of New Hampshire, Durham

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Metaphors in the Construction of Theory: Ramus, Peirce and the American Mind Laurel Warren Trufant University of New Hampshire, Durham University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Doctoral Dissertations Student Scholarship Winter 1990 Metaphors in the construction of theory: Ramus, Peirce and the American mind Laurel Warren Trufant University of New Hampshire, Durham Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/dissertation Recommended Citation Trufant, Laurel Warren, "Metaphors in the construction of theory: Ramus, Peirce and the American mind" (1990). Doctoral Dissertations. 1634. https://scholars.unh.edu/dissertation/1634 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS The most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to orden Un<verSiT, Microtnrrs n'tij'r’dt.und1 A Bt-' & How." Infnrn-’aror Cor' odr'v 300 North ZoeO RodU Ann ArT»or MI4H’U6 ’3-lbOSA 3’3 76' 4 700 800 0600 Order Number 0119148 Metaphors in the construction of theory: Ramus, Peirce and the American mind Trufant, Laurel Warren, Ph.D. University of New Hampshire, 1990 Copyright ©1000 by Trufant, Laurel Warren. All righta reserved. UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 METAPHORS IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THEORY: Ramus, Peirce and the American Mind BY Laurel Warren Trufant B. A., University of New Hampshire, 1970 M. A., University of New Hampshire, 1972 DISSERTATION Submitted to the University- of New Hampshire in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History December, 1990 This dissertation has been examined and approved. Dissertation co-director, Robert M. Mennel Professor of History 3 ^ \ v f 4 n ________________________ Dissertation co-director, Donald J. Wilcox Professor of History __________________ Charles E. Clark, Professor of History U L M j ^ w l K' iWvog________________________ William R. Jones, Professor of History Six« Robert C.Gilmore, Professor of History ____________ Valentine R. Dusek, Associate Professor of Philosophy ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 1990 Laurel Warren Trufant To Donald J. Wilcox The brightest mind and the gentlest soul I've ever encountered. "If I do anything it will be his work." CP 3.405 i v TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION...............................................iv ABSTRACT......................... vi PROLOGUE................................................. 1 Chapter 1 - CHANGING PLACES: Metaphors in the Construction of Theory...................... 4 Chapter 2 - LAW AND ORDER IN THE OLD WEST: Logical Metaphors in European Legal Models.................. 60 Chapter 3 - ARISTOTLE. RAMUS and BA00N: Logical Metaphors in English Scientific Models............... 96 Chapter 4 - ARISTOTLE. RAMUS and DESCARTES: Logical Metaphors in French Scientific Models............... 131 Chapter 5 - RAMUS. LEIBNIZ and WOLFF: Logical Metaphors in German Scientific Models............... 160 Chapter 6 - RAMUS IN THE NEW WORLD: Logical Metaphors in a Colonial Environment................. 210 Chapter 7 - ORDER IN THE COURT: The Logic of Law in America............................... 252 Chapter 8 - BACON and RAMUS: The Logic of Science in America........................... 296 Chapter 9 - RAMUS. LEIBNIZ and PEIRCE; Metaphors of Continuity in Pragmatic Thought................ 357 Chapter 10 - THE MENDING OF ’KNOWUDGE BROKEN’: Peirce and the Continuity Thesis.......................... 386 Chapter 11 - PARADIGM LOST: Instrumental Variations on a Theme from Peirce.............. 434 EPILOGUE............................................... 487 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................... 491 ABSTRACT METAPHORS IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THEORY: Ramus, Peirce and the American Mind by Laurel Warren Trufant University of New Hampshire, December, 1990 This study argues for the mutual impenetration of logical, legal and scientific metaphors and attempts to determine the role played by them in the construction of theory. Specifically it attempts to discover the impact which the metaphors of topical logic may have had on the construction of American ideology. Chapter 1 offers a brief discussion of logical meta­ phors and their relation to the social and intellectual settings which generate them. Chapter 2 extends that dis­ cussion to principles of positive law and political order as they developed in the unstable atmosphere of 16th Century Europe. Chapters 3, 4 and 5 attempt to relate the metaphors defined in Chapters 1 and 2 to the development of the scientific models which emerged during the "scientific revolution" of the 17th Century. These chapters proceed n the context of a discussion of the interaction of Aristotelian, Cartesian and Ramean paradigms. Chapter 6 argues for the crucial importance of topical metaphors in the establishment of order in the American colonies. Chapters 7 and 8 carry the argument for a "New England Mind" into a national setting and discuss how Ramean metaphors contributed to the construction of American conceptions of political order and physical law. These chapters attempt to identify a controlling metaphor of continuity which operated at the base of American models. Chapter 9 claims this metaphor of continuity as the logical ground of pragmatic thought, transmitted to C . S. Peirce through the German logical tradition via Leibniz and Wolff. Chapter 10 extends that discussion to a specific investigation of Peirce’s Illustrations of the Logic of Science, considered here as representative of a fundamental commitment on Peirce’s part to a methodology which would underwrite the rest of his thought. Chapter 11 laments the failure of James, Dewey and Royce to appreciate the power of Peirce’s model and discusses the effect which their fragmentation of his continuous reality had on American phil osophy. Peirce’s logic of science emerges as a funda­ mental expression of an "American mind" with roots sunk deep in a Ramean logical paradigm. vi i PROLOQUB This is a germinal study, intended more to suggest than to convince. It skirts many fascinating issues and scans the surface of others. It offers no demographics, no charts, no quantitative analyses -- in short, nothing to gladden the heart of social historians or sober statisticians. Moreover it proceeds under a clear meth­ odological bias to which I may as well confess at the start. It patently assumes that there are such things as "characteristic German models," "a French intellectual milieu," "English epistemolog.v" or "a New England Mind.” I think there are. The question addressed here is why? This study offers a possible answer grounded in the positive role which metaphors play in the construction of theory. It argues for the mutual impenetration of logi­ cal, legal and scientific metaphors embedded in diverse intellectual settings and attempts to determine the role played by those metaphors in generating characteristic principles of order. Specifically it attempts to discover the impact which the peculiar metaphors of the topical logical tradition may have had on the construction of American ideology. Chapter 1 offers a brief narrative of the provenance of those metaphors and their relation to the 2 social and intellectual settings which generated them. It establishes the topical logic of Peter Ramus as legitimate heir to the tradition of Peter of Spain and explores the effects which Ramean logic had on European models as it interacted with existing forms of analysis. Chapter 2 extends that discussion to questions of positive law and political order as they developed in the unstable atmos­ phere of 16th Century Europe. Chapters 3, 4 and 5 attempt to relate the metaphors defined and described in Chapters 1 and 2 to the development of the scientific models which emerged in England, France and Germany during the "scientific revolution" of the 17th Century. These chap­ ters proceed in the context of a discussion of the interac­ tion of Aristotelian, Cartesian and Ramean paradigms. Chapter 6 argues for the crucial importance of topical metaphors in the establishment of order in the American colonies -- an argument
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Was Shakespeare a Ramist?
    The Oxfordian Volume 22 October 2020 ISSN 1521-3641 The OXFORDIAN The Oxfordian is the peer-reviewed journal of the Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship, a non-profit educational organization that conducts research and publication on the Early Modern period, William Shakespeare and the authorship of Shakespeare’s works. Founded in 1998, the journal offers research articles, essays and book reviews by academicians and independent scholars, and is published annually during the autumn. Writers interested in being published in The Oxfordian should review our publication guidelines at the Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship website: https://shakespeareoxfordfellowship.org/the-oxfordian/ Our postal mailing address is: The Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship PO Box 66083 Auburndale, MA 02466 USA Queries may be directed to the editor, Gary Goldstein, at [email protected] Back issues of The Oxfordian may be obtained by writing to: [email protected] 2 The OXFORDIAN Volume 22 2020 Was Shakespeare a Ramist? Reviewed by Michael Dudley The Rational Shakespeare: Peter Ramus, Edward de Vere, and the Question of Authorship. By Michael Wainwright. Palgrave Macmillan 2018 (324 pp.) in hardcover, paperback and Kindle. he question regarding the authorship of the Works of Shakespeare has for generations been dismissed by most of the intelligentsia as patent Tnonsense or a conspiracy theory—in short, as highly irrational—with a correspondingly dim view of its proponents’ intelligence and sanity. It is therefore singularly refreshing and impres- sive that a scholarly work that acknowledges Edward de Vere as Shakespeare should be entirely premised on an exploration of rationalism, not only in terms of the worldview apparent in the Shakespeare canon, but as a structured argument unto itself.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ramist Style of John Udall: Audience and Pictorial Logic in Puritan Sermon and Controversy
    Oral Tradition, 2/1 (1987): 188-213 The Ramist Style of John Udall: Audience and Pictorial Logic in Puritan Sermon and Controversy John G. Rechtien With Wilbur Samuel Howell’s Logic and Rhetoric in England, 1500-1700 (1956), Walter J. Ong’s Ramus, Method, and the Decay of Dialogue (1958) helped establish the common contemporary view that Ramism impoverished logic and rhetoric as arts of communication.1 For example, scholars agree that Ramism neglected audience accomodation; denied truth as an object of rhetoric by reserving it to logic; rejected persuasion about probabilities; and relegated rhetoric to ornamentation.2 Like Richard Hooker in Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity (I.vi.4), these scholars criticize Ramist logic as simplistic. Their objections identify the consequences of Ramus’ visual analogy of logic and rhetoric to “surfaces,” which are “apprehended by sight” and divorced from “voice and hearing” (Ong 1958:280). As a result of his analogy of knowledge and communication to vision rather than to sound, Ramus left rhetoric only two of its fi ve parts, ornamentation (fi gures of speech and tropes) and delivery (voice and gesture). He stripped three parts (inventio, dispositio, and memory) from rhetoric. Traditionally shared by logic and rhetoric, the recovery and derivation of ideas (inventio) and their organization (dispositio) were now reserved to logic. Finally, Ramus’ method of organizing according to dichotomies substituted “mental space” for memory (Ong 1958:280). In the context of this new logic and the rhetoric dependent on it, a statement was not recognized as a part of a conversation, but appeared to stand alone as a speech event fi xed in space.
    [Show full text]
  • Antoine De Chandieu (1534-1591): One of the Fathers Of
    CALVIN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ANTOINE DE CHANDIEU (1534-1591): ONE OF THE FATHERS OF REFORMED SCHOLASTICISM? A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF CALVIN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY THEODORE GERARD VAN RAALTE GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN MAY 2013 CALVIN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY 3233 Burton SE • Grand Rapids, Michigan • 49546-4301 800388-6034 fax: 616 957-8621 [email protected] www. calvinseminary. edu. This dissertation entitled ANTOINE DE CHANDIEU (1534-1591): L'UN DES PERES DE LA SCHOLASTIQUE REFORMEE? written by THEODORE GERARD VAN RAALTE and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy has been accepted by the faculty of Calvin Theological Seminary upon the recommendation of the undersigned readers: Richard A. Muller, Ph.D. I Date ~ 4 ,,?tJ/3 Dean of Academic Programs Copyright © 2013 by Theodore G. (Ted) Van Raalte All rights reserved For Christine CONTENTS Preface .................................................................................................................. viii Abstract ................................................................................................................... xii Chapter 1 Introduction: Historiography and Scholastic Method Introduction .............................................................................................................1 State of Research on Chandieu ...............................................................................6 Published Research on Chandieu’s Contemporary
    [Show full text]
  • The Proclaimed and Visible Word PETER H
    Word & World 7/2 (1987) Copyright © 1987 by Word & World, Luther Seminary, St. Paul, MN. All rights reserved. page 179 The Proclaimed and Visible Word PETER H. VAN NESS Union Theological Seminary, New York, New York In a recent book, Habits of the Heart, Robert Bellah and colleagues report on the current status of American individualism. As has been the case since Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America, such reflections reveal an enduring feature of American social life. In Bellah’s words: “The inner tensions of American individualism add up to a classic case of ambivalence. We strongly assert the value of our self-reliance and autonomy. We deeply feel the emptiness of a life without sustaining social commitments.”1 The consequences of the American individualist credo can be loneliness, when autonomy is too greatly valued, or conformism, when a rejection of traditional authority combines with an excessive deference to contemporary peers. David Riesman coined the phrase “the lonely crowd” to describe the American social character which suffers in both of these ways.2 One of Bellah’s remedies for such social ills is the nurturing of a culture of meaning and coherence. “We need to learn again from the cultural riches of the human species and to reappropriate and revitalize those riches so that they can speak to our condition today.”3 Biblical and republican traditions stand foremost in Bellah’s list of cultural legacies in need of revitalization. Many Americans seek relief from contemporary social distress in communities of religious worship. The Christian community at worship seems to be a fitting antidote to the social ills portrayed here.
    [Show full text]
  • Petrus Ramus Y El Derecho
    Petrus Ramus y el Derecho Rafael Ramis Barceló Petrus Ramus y el Derecho The Figuerola Institute Programme: Legal History The Programme “Legal History” of the Figuerola Institute of Social Science History –a part of the Carlos III University of Madrid– is devoted to improve the overall knowledge on the history of law from different points of view –academically, culturally, socially, and institutionally– covering both ancient and modern eras. A number of experts from several countries have participated in the Programme, bringing in their specialized knowledge and dedication to the subject of their expertise. To give a better visibility of its activities, the Programme has published in its Book Series a number of monographs on the different aspects of its academic discipline. Publisher: Carlos III University of Madrid Book Series: Legal History Editorial Committee: Manuel Ángel Bermejo Castrillo, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Catherine Fillon, Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3 Manuel Martínez Neira, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Carlos Petit, Universidad de Huelva Cristina Vano, Università degli studi di Napoli Federico II More information at www.uc3m.es/legal_history Petrus Ramus y el Derecho Los juristas ramistas del siglo XVI Rafael Ramis Barceló Historia del derecho, 40 © 2015 Rafael Ramis Barceló Editorial Dykinson c/ Meléndez Valdés, 61 – 28015 Madrid Tlf. (+34) 91 544 28 46 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.dykinson.com Preimpresión: TALLERONCE ISBN: 978-84-9085-683-3 ISSN: 2255-5137 D.L.: M-2486-2016 Versión electrónica disponible en e-Archivo http://hdl.handle.net/10016/22197 Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España Para Antonio Planas Rosselló ÍNDICE Introducción .
    [Show full text]
  • Front Matter
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-60893-0 - The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Philosophy Edited by James Hankins Frontmatter More information THE CAMBRIDGE COMPANION TO RENAISSANCE PHILOSOPHY The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Philosophy provides an introduction to a complex period of change in the subject matter and practice of philosophy. The philosophy of the fourteenth through sixteenth centuries is often seen as transitional between the scholastic philosophy of the Middle Ages and modern philosophy, but the essays collected here, by a distinguished international team of contributors, call these assumptions into question, emphasizing both the continuity with scholastic philosophy and the role of Renaissance philosophy in the emergence of modernity. They explore the ways in which the science, religion, and politics of the period reflect and are reflected in its philosophical life, and they emphasize the dynamism and pluralism of a period which saw both new perspectives and enduring contributions to the history of philosophy. This will be an invaluable guide for students of philosophy, intellectual historians, and all who are interested in Renaissance thought. JAMES HANKINS is Professor of History at Harvard University and editor of Renaissance Civic Humanism: Reappraisals and Reflections (2000, 2004). © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-60893-0 - The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Philosophy Edited by James Hankins Frontmatter More information THE CAMBRIDGE COMPANION TO
    [Show full text]
  • Early Modern Philosophy of Technology: Bacon and Descartes
    Early Modern Philosophy of Technology: Bacon and Descartes By Robert Arnăutu Submitted to Central European University Department of Philosophy In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy Supervisor: Professor Hanoch Ben-Yami CEU eTD Collection Budapest, Hungary 2013 Copyright notice I hereby declare that this dissertation contains no materials accepted for any other degrees in any other institutions of higher education. Also, I declare that this dissertation contains no material previously written and/or published by any other person, except where appropriate acknowledgement has been made in the form of bibliographic reference. Robert Arnăutu June 2013 CEU eTD Collection i Abstract The contemporary understanding of technology is indebted to Bacon and Descartes, who challenged the pre-modern conceptions regarding useful material production. Although the production of artefacts has been a constant activity of humans since the dawn of history, the Ancient world tended to disvalue it, considering it a lower endeavour that aims to satisfy ignoble material needs. Technology, according to Ancient Greek thinkers, cannot surpass nature but can only bring small improvements to it; moreover, there is a difference in kind between natural things and technological artefacts; the activity of inventing and producing useful objects is unsuited for the nobility and for free men; there is an irreducible gap between proper knowledge and the production of artefacts. This approach toward technology is completely
    [Show full text]
  • Preconceived Theories and the Baconian Method
    William T. Lynch. Solomon's Child: Method in the Early Royal Society of London. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001. xv + 292 pp. $60.00, cloth, ISBN 978-0-8047-3291-8. Reviewed by John Henry Published on H-Albion (February, 2003) Preconceived Theories and the Baconian fellows of the Royal Society, and yet the fellows all Method professed to be following the Baconian method. Although written with some fair and real in‐ Among the usual way of dealing with such genuity, this is a deeply fawed book. It suffers seeming contradictions among the fellows is to ac‐ from the fact that the author, somewhat obvious‐ knowledge the contingencies of history, the social ly, uses a number of cases from late seventeenth- usefulness not just of knowledge but also of century English science to support a preconceived knowledge claims, and the concomitant need to theory about the methodology of Francis Bacon. dress things up in carefully chosen rhetoric. Re‐ Given the fact that one of the main strengths of cent scholarship, therefore, has shown how a par‐ the Baconian method lay in its attempt to avoid ticular version of Baconian scientific method was the distortion which inevitably follows from seek‐ used for promotional and propaganda purposes ing evidence to support preconceived theories, by the leading spokesmen for the Royal Society in this is somewhat ironic. their published works, while in their actual prac‐ In large measure the difficulties with the tice, these same fellows did things in a variety of book arise out of the author's decision to base his different ways.
    [Show full text]
  • Blair 2007 Organizations of Knowledge for DASH.Pdf
    Organizations of Knowledge The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Blair, Ann. 2007. "Organizations of Knowledge." In Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Philosophy, edited by James Hankins, 287-303. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Published Version 10.1017/CCOL052184648X.015 Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:29674918 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA manuscript for: Ann Blair, "Organizations of Knowledge," in Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Philosophy, ed. James Hankins (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 287-303. Organizations of Knowledge in the Renaissance The "organization of knowledge" is a large and diffuse topic which can be studied at many different levels, ranging from the way an individual orders his or her understanding of the world privately or in publications, to the ways in which communities or institutions order knowledge, notably in pedagogical curricula and textbooks, professional structures, libraries and library catalogs and other collective projects.1 Although a few modern philosophers have addressed the problem of classifying knowledge, current practices of classification are mostly studied by anthropologists and sociologists.2 Modern cultures and subcultures engage in both explicit and tacit classifications of knowledge, but today any particular organization of knowledge is generally acknowledged to involve a number of arbitrary choices and its success is often measured by pragmatic criteria of effectiveness, such as ease of use and economic efficiency.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Summa Theologiae and the Reformed Traditions Christoph Schwöbel 1. Luther and Thomas Aquinas
    The Summa Theologiae and the Reformed Traditions Christoph Schwöbel 1. Luther and Thomas Aquinas: A Conflict over Authority? On 10 December 1520 at the Elster Gate of Wittenberg, Martin Luther burned his copy of the papal bull Exsurge domine, issued by pope Leo X on 15 June of that year, demanding of Luther to retract 41 errors from his writings. The time for Luther to react obediently within 60 days had expired on that date. The book burning was a response to the burning of Luther’s works which his adversary Johannes Eck had staged in a number of cities. Johann Agricola, Luther’s student and president of the Paedagogium of the University, who had organized the event at the Elster Gate, also got hold of a copy of the books of canon law which was similarly committed to the flames. Following contemporary testimonies it is probable that Agricola had also tried to collect copies of works of scholastic theology for the burning, most notably the Summa Theologiae. However, the search proved unsuccessful and the Summa was not burned alongside the papal bull since the Wittenberg theologians – Martin Luther arguably among them – did not want to relinquish their copies.1 The event seems paradigmatic of the attitude of the early Protestant Reformers to the Summa and its author. In Luther’s writings we find relatively frequent references to Thomas Aquinas, although not exact quotations.2 With regard to the person of Thomas Luther could gleefully report on the girth of Thomas Aquinas, including the much-repeated story that he could eat a whole goose in one go and that a hole had to be cut into his table to allow him to sit at the table at all.3 At the same time Luther could also relate several times and in different contexts in his table talks how Thomas at the time of his death experienced such grave spiritual temptations that he could not hold out against the devil until he confounded him by embracing his Bible, saying: “I believe what is written in this book.”4 At least on some occasions Luther 1 Cf.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Method-2020.Pdf
    The New Scientific Method Rob Iliffe Aristotelian Method • Method, or the principles of argument and demonstration, played a highly important role in Aristotelian system • Medieval scholars understood the group of demonstrative techniques in different fields the ‘Organon’ (Latin ‘Organum’) or ‘tool’. • Aristotelian arguments were not primarily directed against sceptical positions, according to which one might doubt the reliability of individual sensory or cognitive faculties. • This is because ordinary human beings were assumed to experience the world as it really was, and were not deceived by their senses. The syllogistic method • Aristotle’s account of correct inference in science involved more sophisticated versions of the syllogistic method: • All As are Bs (Major premise, e.g. ‘All men are mortal’) • All Bs are Cs (Minor premise, e.g. ‘Socrates is a man’) • Therefore all As are Cs (Conclusion: e.g. ‘Socrates is mortal’). • Science proceeds by organizing data so that the Minor premise is explained by the better known, necessarily true and more fundamental Major premise. • Scientific demonstrations were supposed to go beyond mere syllogisms, to reveal the causal structures of the world. Art and Nature • The Aristotelian system placed limits on the use of artificial devices or techniques in natural philosophy – including mathematics. • Moreover, lenses were either distorting devices, or when they worked well – such as in magnifying glasses – • they made visible objects bigger to sight, rather than revealing things that were too small to be seen with the naked eye. • God would supposedly not have made creatures too small to be seen. • Philosophers assumed that instruments were ludic (playful devices) • And that invasive experimental techniques could not provide information about ‘natural’ motions, animate or inanimate.
    [Show full text]
  • Constructing Natural Historical Facts BACONIAN NATURAL HISTORY in NEWTON’S FIRST PAPER on LIGHT and COLORS
    OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – FIRSTPROOFS, Mon Feb 10 2014, NEWGEN 2 Constructing Natural Historical Facts BACONIAN NATURAL HISTORY IN NEWTON’S FIRST PAPER ON LIGHT AND COLORS Dana Jalobeanu* The peculiar structure of Newton’s first published paper on light and colors has been the subject of an astonishing diversity of readings: to date, scholars still do not agree as to what Newton wanted to prove in this paper or how he proved it.1 The structure of the paper is far from transparent. It consists of two very different parts: a historical account of what Newton called his “crucial experiment,” and a “doctrine of colors” consisting of thirteen propositions and an illustrative experiment. Equally debated has been the “style” of Newton’s demonstration.2 Newton begins the first part with an extensive his- torical account of how he became interested in the “celebrated phenomena of colors” and later reached one of its major results: that the shape of the spectrum refracted * Research for this paper has been supported by the grant PN-II-ID-PCE-2011-3-0719, “From Natural History to Science,” awarded by the CNCS. 1 The paper has been read, in turns, as a formal blunder of a young upstart who dared to make a clear break with the mitigated skepticism and anti-dogmatism of the Royal Society, and as a brilliant exercise of rhetoric aiming to rewrite in the “scientific style of the day” the results of six long years of optical research. The reason for the exercise of rhetoric has also been the subject of fierce debates.
    [Show full text]