Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T14:19:14.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Platonism And The Rise Of Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2009

Meyrick H. Carré
Affiliation:
University of Bristol

Extract

The scientific developments of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries have traditionally been associated with the revival of Platonism. The natural philosophers who invented the methods of classical physics have usually been depicted as men who repudiated the principles of Aristotle and embraced conceptions provided by the writings of Plato and his school. The characteristic feature derived from Platonism was the emphasis on mathematics and it is with the application of mathematics to experience, under specially devised conditions, that modern science arose. In this sense, it is the Piatonism of Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo, which forms the distinctive quality of the scientific revolution that culminates in the work of Newton.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy 1955

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

page 333 note 1 Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences, translated by Crew, H. and Salvio, A. de, New York, 1914, p. 90.Google Scholar

page 333 note 2 cf. Klibansky, R., The Continuity of the Platonic Tradition, London, 1939.Google Scholar

page 334 note 1 See especially Randall, J. H., The Development of Scientific Method in the School of Padua in Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. I, 1940, pp. 177206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 334 note 2 For a detailed account of medieval achievements in scientific theory see Crombie, A. C., Robert Grosseteste and the Origins of Experimental Science, Oxford 1953.Google Scholar

page 335 note 1 Mirandola, G. Pico della, Oration on the Dignity of Man, in The Renaissance Philosophy of Man, edited by Cassirer, E., Kristeller, P. O. and Randall, J. H. Jr, Chicago, 1948, p. 246.Google Scholar

page 335 note 2 For a list of these metaphysical mathematicians see Strong, E. W., Procedures and Metaphysics, Berkeley, 1936, p. 47.Google Scholar

page 336 note 1 Zilsel, E., in Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. I. 1940, p. 113 f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 336 note 2 Quoted by Burtt, E. A., The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science, London, 1932, p. 39.Google Scholar

page 336 note 3 Dugas, R., Histoire de la Mécanique, Neuchatel, 1950, pp. 106–7.Google Scholar

page 337 note 1 A. C. Crombie, Grosseteste, p. 294.

page 337 note 2 Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. XII, 1951.Google Scholar

page 337 note 3 Wiener, P. P., The Tradition behind Galileo's Methodology, in Osiris, Vol. I. 1936. P. 742.Google Scholar

page 338 note 1 Two New Sciences, tr. Crew and Salvio, p. 261.

page 338 note 2 In Studies and Essays offered to George Sarton, edited by Montague, M. R. Ashley, New York, 1944, pp. 279–97.Google Scholar

page 339 note 1 Two New Sciences, tr. Crew and Salvio, p. 276.

page 340 note 1 Republic, 533 c.

page 340 note 22 Phaedo, 79 c.

page 340 note 33 The Republic of Plato, translated by Cornford, F. M., Oxford, 1941, p. 230.Google Scholar Cf. his remarks on the Timaeus, Plato's Cosmology, London, 1937, p. 28.Google ScholarPubMed

page 340 note 4 Crombie, Grosseteste, p. 305.

page 341 note 1 Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, tr. Drake, Stillman, Berkeley, 1953, p. 203.Google Scholar

page 341 note 2 On this point see Markus, R. I., Method and Metaphysics in Dominican Studies, Vol. II, 1949, pp. 358 f.Google Scholar Also Bett, Henry, Nicholas of Cusa, London, 1932, p. 120.Google Scholar

page 342 note 1 Two Chief World Systems, tr. Drake, p. 234.

page 342 note 2 Burtt, op. ci. pp. 75–6, quotes this passage.