Physik

Angelis, Simone De

doi:10.1007/978-3-658-14737-2_16

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In physics, we must strive for harmony between reason and experience . This means that when we prove a proposition we must provide (a) a demonstrative proof of this proposition from principles, and (b) corroborate the proposition by experiment (de Angelis 2018 , p. 340).…”

Section: Christian Wolff’s Axiomatic Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Wolff’s physics is articulated in the Vernünfftige Gedancken von den Würckungen der Natur from 1723 ( Deutsche Physik ) and the Allerhand Nützliche Versuche from 1721–1722 ( Deutsche Experimentalphysik; on Wolff’s physics, see de Angelis 2018 ). The first is a work in what Wolff calls dogmatic physics, and the second a work in experimental physics.…”

Section: Christian Wolff’s Axiomatic Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such a reading is incompatible with Wolff’s definitions of science, which, as we have seen, stress that propositions must be certain. Moreover, as de Angelis notes ( 2018 , p. 339), in his Deutsche Experimentalphysik Wolff notes that the goal of physical enquiry is certainty (C. Wolff [ 1727 ] 1982, Vorrede). We submit that Wolff viewed his axiomatic ideal of science as an ideal that was not always realized in scientific practice.…”

Section: Christian Wolff’s Axiomatic Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Axiomatic Natural Philosophy and the Emergence of Biology as a Science

Berg

Demarest

2020

J Hist Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ernst Mayr argued that the emergence of biology as a special science in the early nineteenth century was possible due to the demise of the mathematical model of science and its insistence on demonstrative knowledge. More recently, John Zammito has claimed that the rise of biology as a special science was due to a distinctive experimental, anti-metaphysical, anti-mathematical, and anti-rationalist strand of thought coming from outside of Germany. In this paper we argue that this narrative neglects the important role played by the mathematical and axiomatic model of science in the emergence of biology as a special science. We show that several major actors involved in the emergence of biology as a science in Germany were working with an axiomatic conception of science that goes back at least to Aristotle and was popular in mid-eighteenth-century German academic circles due to its endorsement by Christian Wolff. More specifically, we show that at least two major contributors to the emergence of biology in Germany—Caspar Friedrich Wolff and Gottfried Reinhold Treviranus—sought to provide a conception of the new science of life that satisfies the criteria of a traditional axiomatic ideal of science. Both C.F. Wolff and Treviranus took over strong commitments to the axiomatic model of science from major philosophers of their time, Christian Wolff and Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, respectively. The ideal of biology as an axiomatic science with specific biological fundamental concepts and principles thus played a role in the emergence of biology as a special science.

show abstract

Section: Christian Wolff’s Axiomatic Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Christian Wolff’s Axiomatic Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Christian Wolff’s Axiomatic Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Axiomatic Natural Philosophy and the Emergence of Biology as a Science

Berg

Demarest

2020

J Hist Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Importantly, Wolff states that the propositions that we demonstrate in physics must also be verified through experience. Through this procedure, we obtain what Wolff calls a harmony between reason and experience (De Angelis 2018 , p. 340). In other words, when we prove a proposition in physics we should provide (a) a demonstrative proof of the proposition from first principles, and (b) verify the proposition by means of experience or experiment.…”

Section: Theoretical Virtues Then and Nowmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical virtues in eighteenth-century debates on animal cognition

Berg

2020

HPLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within eighteenth-century debates on animal cognition we can distinguish at least three main theoretical positions: (i) Buffon’s mechanism, (ii) Reimarus’ theory of instincts, and (iii) the sensationalism of Condillac and Leroy. In this paper, I adopt a philosophical perspective on this debate and argue that in order to fully understand the justification Buffon, Reimarus, Condillac, and Leroy gave for their respective theories, we must pay special attention to the theoretical virtues these naturalists alluded to while justifying their position. These theoretical virtues have received little to no attention in the literature on eighteenth-century animal cognition, but figure prominently in the justification of the mechanist, instinctive, and sensationalist theories of animal behavior. Through my philosophical study of the role of theoretical virtues in eighteenth-century debates on animal cognition, we obtain a deeper understanding of how theoretical virtues were conceptualized in eighteenth-century science and how they influenced the justification of theories of animal cognition.

show abstract

Physik

Cited by 2 publications

References 6 publications

Axiomatic Natural Philosophy and the Emergence of Biology as a Science

Axiomatic Natural Philosophy and the Emergence of Biology as a Science

Theoretical virtues in eighteenth-century debates on animal cognition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About