Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-jwnkl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-09T17:27:12.445Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Galileo and Reasoning Ex Suppositione: The Methodology of the Two New Sciences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

William A. Wallace
William A. Wallace*
Affiliation:
The Catholic University of America Washington, D.C.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Galileo has been seen, from the philosophical point of view, alternately as a Platonist whose rationalist insights enabled him to read the book of nature because it was written in ‘the language of mathematics,’ and as an experimentalist who used the hypothetico-deductive methods of modern science to establish his new results empirically (McTighe, 1967; Settle, 1967; Drake, 1970; Shapere, 1974). Both of these views present difficulties. In this paper I shall make use of recent historical research to argue that neither is correct, that the method utilized by Galileo was neither Platonist nor hypothetico-deductivist, but was basically Aristotelian and Archimedean in character. This method, moreover, was not merely that of classical antiquity, but it had been emended and rejuvenated in the sixteenth century, and then not by Greek humanist Aristotelians or by Latin Averroists but rather by scholastic authors of the Collegio Romano whose own inspiration derived mainly from Thomas Aquinas.

Type
Contributed Papers: Session I
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1974 , 1974 , pp. 78 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © 1976 by D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht-Holland

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.)

Footnotes

*

The research on which this paper is based was supported by the National Science Foundation, whose assistance is gratefully acknowledged. The author also expresses his thanks to Stillman Drake and Thomas McTighe for their helpful comments on an earlier version read at the Philosophy of Science Association biennial meeting at Notre Dame on November 1,1974.

References

Blake, R. M., Ducasse, C. J., and Madden, E. H.: 1960, Theories of Scientific Method: The Renaissance through the Nineteenth Century, Univ. of Washington Press, Seattle.Google Scholar
Crombie, A. G: 1975, ‘The Sources of Galileo's Early Natural Philosophy’, in Righini Bonelli, M. L. and Shea, W. R. (eds.), Reason, Experiment, and Mysticism in the Scientific Revolution, Science History Publications, New York, 1975, pp. 157–175, 303-305.Google Scholar
Drake, S.: 1970, Galileo Studies: Personality, Tradition, and Revolution, Univ. of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Drake, S.: 1973a, ‘Galileo's Discovery of the Law of Free Fall,’ Scientific American 228, pp. 84–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drake, S.: 1973b, ‘Galileo's Experimental Confirmation of Horizontal Inertia: Unpublished Manuscripts’, (Galileo Gleanings XXII), Isis 64, pp. 290–305.Google Scholar
Drake, S. (ed.): 1974, Galileo Galilei: Two New Sciences, including Centers of Gravity and Force of Percussion, translated with introduction and notes, Univ. of Wisconsin Press, Madison.Google Scholar
Duhem, P.: 1913, Etudes sur Leonardde Vinci, Vol. 3, A. Hermann et Fils, Paris.Google Scholar
Duhem, P.: 1969, To Save the Phenomena. An Essay on the Idea of Physical Theory from Plato to Galileo, tr. Doland, E. and Maschler, C., Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Favaro, A. (ed.): 1890-1909, Le Opere di Galileo Galilei, 20 vols. in 21, G. Barbera, Florence, reprinted 1968.Google Scholar
Finnochiaro, M. A.: 1972, ‘Vires acquirit eundo: The Passage Where Galileo Renounces Space-Acceleration and Causal Investigation’, Physis 14, 125–145.Google Scholar
Fredette, R.: 1972, ‘Galileo's De motu antiquiora’ , Physis 14, 321–348.Google Scholar
Harré, R.: 1972, The Philosophies of Science. An Introductory Survey. Oxford Univ. Press, London, Oxford and New York.Google Scholar
Koertge, N.: 1974, ‘Galileo and the Problem of Accidents’, paper read to the British Society for the Philosophy of Science, October 7, 1974, being readied for publication.Google Scholar
Koyré, A.: 1939, Etudes Galileenes, Hermann, Paris, reprinted 1966.Google Scholar
Koyré, A.: 1968, Metaphysics and Measurement. Essays in Scientific Revolution, Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Koyré, A. and Cohen, I. B.: 1972, Isaac Newton's Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, 3d ed. of 1726 with variant readings, 2 vols., Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
MacLachlan, J.: 1973, ‘A Test of an “Imaginary” Experiment of Galileo's,’ Isis 64, 374–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McTighe, T. P.: 1967, ‘Galileo's “Platonism”: A Reconsideration’, in McMullin, E. (ed.), Galileo, Man of Science, Basic Books, Inc., New York and London, 1967, pp. 365–387.Google Scholar
Naylor, R. H.: 1974, ‘Galileo and the Problem of Free Fall’, The British Journal for the History of Science 7, 105–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purnell, F.: 1972, ‘Jacopo Mazzoni and Galileo’, Physis 14, 273–294.Google Scholar
Schmitt, C. B.: 1972, ‘The Faculty of Arts at Pisa at the Time of Galileo’, Physis 14, 243–272.Google Scholar
Settle, T. B.: 1961, ‘An Experiment in the History of Science’, Science 133, 19–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Settle, T. B.: 1967, ‘Galileo's Use of Experiment as a Tool of Investigation’, in McMullin, E. (ed.), Galileo, Man of Science, Basic Books, Inc., New York and London, 1967, pp. 315–337.Google Scholar
Shapere, D.: 1974, Galileo: A Philosophical Study, Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.Google Scholar
Shea, W. R.: 1972, Galileo's Intellectual Revolution. Middle Period 1610-1632, Science History Publications, New York.Google Scholar
Shea, W. R. and Wolf, N. S.: 1975, ‘Stillman Drake and the Archimedean Grandfather of Experimental Science’, to appear in Isis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, W. A.: 1959, The Scientific Methodology ofTheodoric of Freiberg, Fribourg Univ. Press, Fribourg.Google Scholar
Wallace, W. A.: 1968, ‘The Enigma of Domingo de Soto: Uniformiter difformis and Falling Bodies in Late Medieval Physics’, Isis 59, 384–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, W. A.: 1969, ‘The “Calculatores” in Early Sixteenth-Century Physics’, The British Journal for the History of Science 4, 221–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, W. A.: 1971, ‘Mechanics from Bradwardine to Galileo’, Journal of the History of Ideas 32, 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, W. A.: 1972, Causality and Scientific Explanation, Vol. I. Medieval and Early Classical Science, Univ. of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Wallace, W. A.: 1974a, Causality and Scientific Explanation, Vol. II. Classical and Contemporary Science, Univ. of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Wallace, W. A.: 1974b, ‘Galileo and the Thomists’, St. Thomas Aquinas Commemorative Studies 1274-1974, 2 vols., Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Toronto, 1974, Vol. 2, pp. 293–330.Google Scholar
Wallace, W. A.: 1974c, ‘Theodoric of Freiberg: On the Rainbow’, in A Source Book in Medieval Science, Grant, E. (ed.), Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1974, pp. 435–441.Google Scholar
Wallace, W. A.: 1974d, ‘Three Classics of Science: Galileo, Two New Sciences, etc.’, in The Great Ideas Today 1974, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Chicago, pp. 211–272.Google Scholar
Wisan, W. L.: 1974, ‘The New Science of Motion: A Study of Galileo's De mom localf’ , Archive for History of Exact Sciences 13, 103–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar