Abstract
Francis Bacon’s natural philosophy contains a whole series of interconnected concepts related to extension, such as “borders,” “leaps” and “orbs of virtue.” These Baconian concepts are still not fully understood and are in need of a detailed analysis. They do not derive from a general conception of physical or mathematical space, and are not explainable in terms of parts of matter and aggregates. Instead, they are somewhat mysteriously defined in terms of limits and boundaries of action. This article offers a contextual investigation of Bacon’s extension relating concepts. I show that in adopting a particular strategy of deriving spatial properties and extension related concepts from a theory of action and force, Bacon follows in the footsteps of Gilbert’s magnetic philosophy. However, in contrast to the more traditional approaches of William Gilbert, Giovan Battista della Porta and Johannes Kepler, Bacon strips his extension-related concepts from most natural philosophical content and argues for a methodologically driven approach, leading to operational definitions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For Bacon, the universe is made of regions and layers endowed with dissimilar properties. Change mostly happens (and is especially easier to see) at the “borders” between these regions (OFB VI 123ff; 145, 149, 177). On Bacon’s cosmology, see Rees (1975a, b, 1996), Manzo (2006). On the relative stability of the regions and the activity at the borders see OFB VI 137, 145. See also Rees (1979, 204). These “natural borders” are sometimes described in terms of “leaps.” Thus, Bacon claims that there are great leaps “from the region of the air to the region of the Moon, and similarly there is an enormous leap [saltus] from the heaven of the Moon to the heaven of the stars.” (OFB VI 177).
- 2.
For Bacon, each individual body contains spirits, or pneumatics, endowed with “the appetite and faculty of constantly generating, multiplying and spreading themselves in all directions […] of mutually attacking and invading one another” (OFB VI 231). More generally, bodies exhibit virtues operating by contact, but also at a distance (OFB XI 369); also, most bodies emit both tangible and pneumatic effluvia (SEH II 643–645).
- 3.
OFB XI 369.
- 4.
Gilbert (1893, 304, 1600, 205).
- 5.
In the ANN, Bacon proposes an inquiry into the “measure of distance or the orb of virtue [mensura spatij, sive the orbe virtutis]; this is the distance which the powers of bodies may travel to, stop at, build up and die down from.” OFB XIII 211.
- 6.
The same ANN contains a second definition of the orbs of virtue, in terms of “the distance that perception reaches to;” OFB XIII 195. I discuss Bacon’s definition of “perception” in the second part of this paper.
- 7.
- 8.
Della Porta describes a radiative process in which the magnetic virtue emanates within a certain orb of virtue. See Porta (1658, 199, 203). Porta’s explanation of magnetic coition is formulated in terms of an “active” and a passive form of sympathy: the magnetic virtue excites a response in other magnets (because of similitude of substance) and iron (which has some form of passive or potential magnetic virtue). As a result, attracted bodies “run” towards the attractive, “to meet it, to be embraced by it” (Porta 1658, 201). For a discussion of Porta’s descriptions of magnetism see Kodera (2014).
- 9.
- 10.
This is how some of Della Porta’s medicines are supposed to work. See Book 8, Porta (1658).
- 11.
As it has been shown, Gilbert attempted to construct a comprehensive, “cosmological” theory on the basis of this division. Gilbert also claims that there are only two kinds of attraction, magnetic and electric. Gilbert (1893, 170). On Gilbert’s cosmology, see Freudenthal (1983). For a more general discussion of Gilbert’s theory in context see Hesse (1960a, b).
- 12.
The distinction between electrics and magnetics is made in terms of matter theory: electric bodies are those containing “humours;” while magnetics contain “earth.” Both electrics and magnetics have attractive powers, but the mechanisms of attraction are different. In the case of electrics, material effluvia produce attractive effects. Gilbert (1893, 340). See Pumfrey (1989, 48). See also Pumfrey (1987, 92 ff). On the discussion of the difference between virtues propagated through effluvia and the propagation of magnetic virtue, see Gilbert (1893, 107 ff).
- 13.
Gilbert (1893, 123–124). See also Henry (2001). In De mundo Gilbert claims that the orbs of effluvia around planets are small, while the interstellar spaces are void. Light and magnetic virtue can “travel” through empty space. See De mundo Book II Chaps. 25–27. Gilbert (1651, 212–214). For Gilbert, the nature of magnetism is similar to that of the (animal) soul. Like soul, magnetic virtue is a specific, active form of a body, possessing natural motion. It can exist in a dormant form in iron and steel, and in a more actualized, perfect form, in magnets, magnetized iron and in the celestial bodies. Gilbert’s model is the world soul or the celestial intelligences of the planets; each great globes has its own “soul” (animate force/vigour), those of the Sun and stars being “superior” to those of smaller globes. See Gilbert (1893, 308).
- 14.
Gilbert (1893, 123).
- 15.
More on the ways in which magnetic virtue is constitutive of spatial organization in the next section.
- 16.
Gilbert (1893, 308–309, 311). Similarly, Gilbert claims that the Sun has the power to incite motion in the celestial globes, causing them “to advance in their courses […] by sending forth the energies of his spheres.” Gilbert (1893, 333). Although it is usually said that Gilbert only acknowledges the cosmological implications of his magnetic philosophy in book VI of De magnete, there are numerous passages throughout the other books as well which ascribe celestial motions to magnetic energy and talk about the “law of the whole,” or about the “ordering and planning of the universe and the earth.” See Gilbert (1600, 41, 44). For a discussion of Gilbert’s “cosmic magnetic field” see Miller (2014).
- 17.
This does not mean that Gilbert abandons the matter theory of the “electrics” and “magnetics” (although De mundo might be said to qualify it significantly). It merely means that he adopts a phenomenological strategy, in the attempt to operationalize some of the elements of the explanation.
- 18.
Gilbert (1893, 150–151).
- 19.
- 20.
See for example Gilbert (1893, 161–163). Gilbert distinguishes clearly between the variation of the “strength” of coition (which strongly decreases with the distance) and the variation of the direction, orientation and rotation in the magnetic field, which have more complex forms of variation. See Georgescu (2014).
- 21.
On the dependence of the strength of attraction on the qualities of matter see Gilbert (1893, 167–169). However, the more important variable seems to be the geometry of the magnet, which determines both the geometry of the orb and the strength of attraction. For example, elongated magnet “attracts best at the vertex.” Gilbert (1893, 122).
- 22.
Gilbert (1893, 136): “[…] here on earth, naught can be held aloof from the magnetic control of the earth and the loadstone and all magnetic bodies are brought into orderly array by the supreme terrene form, and loadstone and iron sympathize with loadstone though solid bodies stand between.” See also Gilbert (1893, 212–213). Gilbert claims that “the matter of the entire orb conspire[s], produces verticity in bodies” (Gilbert 1893, 216). Thus, one standard procedure for fabricating a magnet recommended by Gilbert and his followers is to heat up a piece of clay and cool it down oriented in the lines of the Earth’s magnetic field.
- 23.
Gilbert (1893, 209). Gilbert discusses in Book III many examples of multiple magnetic interactions, showing how changes in verticity occur, or how magnetic power can be renewed, diminished and lost as a result of these interactions. These kinds of loss of magnetic powers do not happen in magnets, however, because in the loadstone force is “innate” and “inhere more closely, nor do they easily retire from their ancient seats.” (Gilbert 1893, 209).
- 24.
Gilbert (1893, 142).
- 25.
Gilbert (1893, 150–151).
- 26.
Gilbert (1893, 142). Magnetic union is not only a property of loadstone and iron but seems to be a much more widespread property. For example, Gilbert gives an example of grafting: if a branch is cut into two halfs, one cannot graft another branch on the upper part, but only on the lower part. This is because, Gilbert claims, “the vegetative force […] tends in a fixed direction.” Gilbert (1893, 200).
- 27.
Gilbert distinguishes between four different magnetic motions: coition (attraction, verticity, declination and magnetic dip).
- 28.
- 29.
Gilbert (1893, 304, 1600, 205).
- 30.
Laura Georgescu claims in a recent paper that Gilbert’s main contribution to the development of magnetic philosophy lies in shifting the interest from the phenomenon of attraction to the orientation in space, spatial distribution and symmetries. See Georgescu (draft).
- 31.
The geometry of the orb of virtue corresponds to the geometry of the magnet; orbs are only spherical around spherical magnets; they are oriented according to the magnet’s axis and have, similarly, “fixed poles.” In the case of the Earth, Gilbert emphasizes time and again, that poles and the magnetic axis are “permanent, and fixed, and natural.” (Gilbert 1893, 67).
- 32.
For example, an elongated magnet creates an elongated orb and concentrates the magnetic forces at the poles. As a result, Gilbert claims, “the force supplied by other parts [of the magnet] […] are better massed and united, and thus united they are stronger and greater.” (Gilbert 1893, 131). See also Miller (2014, 74).
- 33.
David Marshall Miller has suggested that Gilbert replaced the traditional spherical representation of space with a “geographical representation” of space and that this geographical framework is essential for understanding Gilbert’s descriptions and explanations of magnetic phenomena. However, unlike the geographer’s spatial representation, Gilbert’s geographical representation corresponds to the physical properties of the magnet and its surrounding space. The magnet “sets” and “defines” the spatial properties of the orb of virtue. As Marshall has convincingly shown, Gilbert is using this particular spatial (geographical) representation to discuss limits and symmetries of the orb of virtue (Miller 2014, 70–73).
- 34.
See also the passages of Book III, Gilbert (1893, 180–181).
- 35.
- 36.
Gilbert (1893, 304).
- 37.
For example, an elongated magnet creates an elongated orb and concentrates the magnetic forces at the poles. As a result, Gilbert claims, “the force supplied by other parts [of the magnet] […] are better massed and united, and thus united they are stronger and greater.”(Gilbert 1893, 131). See also Miller (2014, 74).
- 38.
For details of Gilbert’s construction and reasoning see Georgescu (2014).
- 39.
See for example (Gilbert 1893, 150–151). Gilbert claims that the force of attraction (coition) emanates “from the whole mass” of the magnet. In this way, the magnetic attraction has a radial symmetry. Meanwhile, the rotation and orientation towards the poles are directed by a different kind of symmetry. The two superposed symmetries describe the spatial distribution (orientation) around a magnet.
- 40.
In modern terms, Gilbert maps separately the strength and the direction of the magnetic field.
- 41.
Gilbert (1893, 151). Gilbert claims that, in principles, “forces are the same on the same parallel,” at least unless there are no variations produced by the “inequalities” of the magnet.
- 42.
Gilbert (1893, 150).
- 43.
Gilbert (1893, 151).
- 44.
Gilbert (1893, 307). It is not clear how this particular property is derived from Gilbert’s empirical construction or from his “diagrammatic reasoning.” Here, most probably, considerations of symmetry play a more important part in Gilbert’s reasoning than empirical considerations. Most probably, Gilbert’s reasoning is motivated by his interest in planetary motion.
- 45.
Although magnetic virtue propagates spherically through space, the magnetic action is oriented along (or parallel) to the magnetic axis. For a discussion of Gilbert’s “oriented space” see (Miller 2014, 99–100; 103–105).
- 46.
Some scholars have attempted to limit Gilbert’s magnetic philosophy to the Earth, claiming that one can separate book VI from the rest. This type of interpretation was widespread amongst Gilbert’s own contemporaries and is nicely exemplified in the debate between John Barlow and Mark Ridley. See Barlow (1616) and Ridley (1613, 1617). In fact, Gilbert’s cosmology is not limited to book VI; statements regarding the cosmological significance of magnetism abound. And Gilbert often refers to the “ordering and planning of the universe and the earth,” (Gilbert 1600, 44) or to the fact that magnetic planetary globes take position (are ordered) in the universe according to a “law of the whole” [totius normam.] (Gilbert 1600, 41). For a more general discussion of Gilbert’s magnetic cosmology in terms of a “cosmic magnetic field” see Miller (2014, 66–71).
- 47.
See for example Gilbert (1893, 332–333). Also, Gilbert claims that all planets are in the “orb of influence” of the Sun. It is not entirely clear from this context whether this is the magnetic orb, or the orb of virtue of Sun’s light. But the Sun is said to be “the chief inciter of action in nature,” and the cause of planetary motions. Gilbert (1893, 333, 1600, 224). While planets are said to be situated “within the sphere of Sun’s forces.” (Gilbert 1893, 344).
- 48.
Gilbert (1893, 308–309): “[…] each homogenic part tends to its own globe and inclines in the direction common to the whole world, and in all globes the effused forms reach out and are projected in a sphere all round, and have their own bounds—hence the order and regularity of all the motions and revolutions of the planets, and their circuits.” In a similar passage in which he describes the orientation of Earth’s magnetic axis, Gilbert proposes a “primary soul” (of the world). (Gilbert 1893, 329).
- 49.
See for example Gilbert (1893, 310–311). “Therefore the bodies of the globes, as being the foremost parts of the universe, to the end they might be in themselves as in their state endure, had need of souls to be conjoined to them, for else there were neither life, nor prime act, nor movement, nor unition, nor order, nor coherence, nor conactus, nor sympathia, nor any generation, nor alternation of seasons, and no propagation; but all were in confusion and the entire world lapse into chaos, and, in fine, the earth were void and dead and without any use.”
- 50.
Gilbert (1893, 311–312).
- 51.
- 52.
- 53.
- 54.
Significantly, this case is not treated in De magnete but in Gilbert’s unpublished De mundo.
- 55.
This is why, according to Gilbert, the Moon always turns the same face toward the Earth; Gilbert (1651, 186–187).
- 56.
Water, in Gilbert’s theory, is among the electrics, and so it is air or atmospheric vapors. The problem with this explanation is that one has to suppose that material effluvia extend all the way to the Moon which is, of course, a serious problem. See Freudenthal (1983, 31–33).
- 57.
Gilbert claims, in De mundo, that there are orbs of effluvia around every planet, i.e., that each planet has a natural magnetic motion and a natural sphere of activity. That is each planet is composed of a mixture of electric humors and magnetic “earth.” See Gilbert (1651, 109).
- 58.
- 59.
At least for the motions of the celestial globes, Gilbert claims that “connate in them are reason, knowledge, science, judgment.”(Gilbert 1893, 312, 344).
- 60.
Kepler’s letter to Georg Brengger, 30 November 1607, JKGW vxi 86.
- 61.
Kepler (1992, 101), KGW iv 51.
- 62.
Kepler (1992, 398), KGW iv 251.
- 63.
Kepler (1992, 52), KGW iv 52.
- 64.
Kepler (1992, 390–391), KGW iv 246.
- 65.
As Bruce Stephenson has pointed out, in Chap. 57 of Astronomia nova, Kepler offers two theories to account for the planet’s libration. One of these theories attempts to give an explanation in terms of a quasi-magnetic force. The other presupposes the reintroduction of a planetary mind. See Stephenson (1994, 120–121).
- 66.
Kepler (1992, 68), KGW iv 35.
- 67.
A lot has been written on the status of Kepler’s analogy. For the purpose of the present paper, it is less important whether Kepler really states that the Sun is a magnet or that the anima motrix is a species of the same genus as magnetic force. In both cases, the types of conceptual difficulties he is facing are very similar to Gilbert’s own difficulties in explaining mutual magnetic interaction. For a discussion see Barker and Goldstein (2001, 109–110), Voelkel (2001, 237 ff).
- 68.
One of the clearest statements of this point can be found in the letter to Maestlin, March 5 1605, KGW vol. XV 172. The Sun is said to be a “circularly magnetic body,” rotating “in its place [by virtue of a facultas animalis already found in Plato], whereby it carries around its oribis virtutis with it.” In the same letter, Kepler emphasizes the fact that Sun’s magnetic virtue is not attractive but “directive,” organizing the space around the Sun in such a way that the planets are moved “more slowly” or “more quickly” according to their position in the orb of virtue. See also Chaps. 33, 34 and 58 of Astronomia nova.
- 69.
- 70.
See KGW III 355. The Sun does not “attract” planets, but has only a “directing force [vis directoria].” In addition, this directing force acts within the plane of the ecliptic. It is worth emphasizing that, for Kepler, both magnetic and gravitational attraction always take place in the orb of virtue.
- 71.
Kepler (1992, 68), KGW iv 35.
- 72.
Kepler (1992, 399), KGW iv 252.
- 73.
Kepler (1992, 387), KGW iv 243.
- 74.
Kepler (1992, 398), KGW iv 251.
- 75.
KGW vii, 302; for a discussion on the nature of Kepler’s immateriate species see Rabin (2005, 53–54).
- 76.
Kepler (1992, 407), KGW iv 256.
- 77.
For a more general discussion see Krafft (1991).
- 78.
The planet’s libration is the effect of its own magnetic faculty; however, Kepler agrees that this is a complex motion and he ascribes it to the planet’s capacity to perceive the angular size of the sun and thus, to know its distance from it and to regulate its own motion. See Voelkel (2001, 179).
- 79.
One of Kepler’s fundamental axioms is that “a body of a planet is inclined by nature to rest in every place where it is put by itself.” (Kepler 1992, 407), KGW iv 256.
- 80.
For a discussion of Kepler’s understanding of inertia see Krafft (1991, 215).
- 81.
Here I agree with Krafft’s conclusion, namely that “the idea of a general mutual gravitation” never came to Kepler’s mind. See Krafft (1991, 218).
- 82.
Incidentally, this also raises the question of the entangled and extremely interesting inter-relation between theory and experiment in Bacon’s inquiries. In other papers, I suggested that Bacon’s speculative natural philosophy plays the role of a background theory in the formulation of his experimental investigations. (Jalobeanu 2013).
- 83.
I have discussed this strategy more extensively in Jalobeanu (2015a). Here, the discussion will be limited to one example, that of the “orb of virtue”.
- 84.
- 85.
SEH II 602.
- 86.
It is tempting to read Bacon’s types of effluvia in corpuscular terms, and his classification as one of substances made of increasingly smaller corpuscles. However, this is not Bacon’s definition of subtlety. Subtlety refers to perception; it is a generic name for describing the multiple and complex ways in which fundamental processes taking place in nature escape the senses. See OFB XI 347.
- 87.
SEH II 644.
- 88.
In Sylva Sylvarum Bacon extensively discusses the role of such intervening media, such as the air, in the transmission of odours and diseases. He is also interested in natural magic tricks of extending the “natural range” of human imagination. More experiments on the role of the media in electric attractions can be found in Bacon (1679, 140–151).
- 89.
Sympathetic attraction comprises “the attraction in gold of the spirit of quicksilver;” “the attraction of heat at distance, and that of fire to naphta; and that of some herbs of water, though at distance; and divers others.” See SEH II 644.
- 90.
See also Bacon (1679, 150–151).
- 91.
Bacon’s list of short-ranged actions contains quite diverse items: instances of electric attraction, but also “bubbles” in water, “merging when they come together.” Instances of action-at-a-distance properly speaking comprise gravitation, magnetic attraction, but also the particular form of consent through which plants attract water, even at a distance, etc. Bacon also opens the possibility of very long, cosmic “orbs of virtue” in the case of magnetic disposition (orientation) and gravitational effects.
- 92.
OFB XI 369.
- 93.
OFB XIII 195; see also the next section. The unfinished Filum labyrinthi sive Inquisitio legitima de motu proposes another classification of simple motions in terms of categories such as space, time and alteration. SEH III 630; it is worth emphasizing that in this classification, the motions “with respect to space” cover very diverse tendencies of a body to avoid the void (motus nexus) to avoid interpenetration by other bodies (motus plagae); to keep within the limits of its own sphere (motus libertatis) and to change its sphere (motus hyles migrantis, sive ad sphaeram novam).
- 94.
OFB XIII 211–213.
- 95.
OFB XI 371.
- 96.
OFB VI 157; OFB XI 317–319; OFB XI 329–331.
- 97.
OFB XII 133; Historia gravis et levis was one of the six natural histories Bacon planned to write in the last five years of his life. Its manuscript has not survived.
- 98.
OFB XI 329. Bacon claims that this is the case of the lower comets, but also that of large clouds over the seas. See also OFB XI 317–319. Bacon also suggests various ideas for experiments attempting to find a quantitative relation between weight and the actual position in the orb of virtue. See SEH II 353–354.
- 99.
OFB XII 133.
- 100.
For example, a series of experiments in Sylva sylvarum attempts to determine four magnetic motions in the Moon: the “drawing forth of heat; the inducing of putrefaction; the increase of moisture; the exciting of the motions of spirits.” (SEH II 636). All these magnetic motions are instances of action-at-a-distance; and some of them are classified as instances of the “simple” magnetic motion. In addition, the Moon has the (magnetic) virtue to “lift up the waters,” to “make moist bodies swell or inflate,” etc. Bacon also mentions repeatedly the magnetic virtue of the Sun, which “holds” Venus and Mercury very close to the Sun’s orbit. OFB XI 399. It is worth noting that in classifying magnetic phenomena, Bacon moves certain magnetic motions from one class of simple motions to another. See for example OFB XI 397–401; OFB XIII 197–198.
- 101.
Bacon uses the term “magnetic motion,” or motion of congregation [motum magneticum sive congregativum]; or “great magnetic motions,” for all mutual attractions where masses of matter are involved (bodies tending to unite with great masses of connaturals). See OFB VI 193; OFB XIII 195. This also extend to purely pneumatic matter, such as the celestial fire.
- 102.
Bacon’s bodies are configurations of matter in motion; and he attempts to explain these perceptible motions in terms of a small, fixed number of simple motions. Bacon has various lists of such simple motions. There are interesting differences between one list and the other, both in terms of the number of simple motions and in terms of the actual description of one motion or another. On Bacon’s doctrine of simple motions, see Manzo (2006), Rusu (2013), Weeks (2007) and Jalobeanu (2015a).
- 103.
OFB VI 189.
- 104.
OFB XIII 195. The orb of virtue for this motion can also be very large. In Novum organum Bacon claims that this motion arises “from a certain harmony and consent of the world,” a type of consent which manifests itself at distances greater than the orb of virtue of the Earth. This marks the particular place Bacon gives to verticity which, he claims, is simply the way in which solid, “robust” bodies participate in the cosmic, diurnal motion of the universe (SEH V 455).
- 105.
OFB VI 193.
- 106.
SEH III 627.
- 107.
Bacon calls these rules “cannons of ascendency,” and discusses some of them among the instances of special powers of the Novum organum. OFB XI 413–417.
- 108.
His ANN can be read as an unfinished, sketchy attempt to provide such rules of composition, with the intention of bridging the gap between his request of experimental investigation and what looks like a metaphysics of schematisms of matter and simple motions.
- 109.
OFB XIII 195.
- 110.
SEH II 602.
- 111.
SEH V 403–305.
- 112.
SEH V 405.
- 113.
OFB VI 267: “For place has not power, and body is not acted upon save by body, and all the haste of a body which seems to be aimed at positioning itself somewhere, it longing and labour for configuration relative to another body, and not relative to a mere location or position.” Bacon also claims that in addition to mutual motions there is a “cosmical” motion of rotation; but even that is a motion received “by consent” with the whole universe and not a self-motion properly speaking. See OFB VI 180–181.
- 114.
This is a simple situation because, in Bacon’s view, motions of major congregation (the great magnetic motion) always prevail in competition with other motions. This is why one can investigate weight and the motion of gravity independently of any other motion. OFB XI 417.
- 115.
OFB XI 329; SEH II 353–354.
- 116.
Most of the time, any assessment of the orb of magnetic virtue has to take into consideration weight as well. Bacon usually gives examples where magnetic virtue “gives way” to gravitational attraction. However, in the Inquisitio de magnete there are also cases where the experimenter screens off the gravitational attraction in order to concentrate on either coition or verticity.
- 117.
- 118.
References
Bacon, Francis. 1679. Baconiana, or certaine genuine remains of sir Francis Bacon, baron of Verulam, and viscount of St. Albans in arguments civil and moral, natural, medical, theological, and bibliographical. London: I. D. for Richard Chiswell.
Barker, Peter, and B.R. Goldstein. 2001. Theological foundations of Kepler’s astronomy. Osiris 16: 88–113.
Barlow, William. 1616. Magneticall aduertisements: or, diuers pertinent obseruations, and approued experiments, concerning the nature and properties of the load-stone. London: E. Griffin for Timothy Barlow.
Dupré, Sven. 2012. Kepler’s optics without hypotheses. Synthese 185(3): 501–525.
Freudenthal, Gad. 1983. Theory of matter and cosmology in William Gilbert’s De magnete. ISIS 74(1): 22–37.
Georgescu, Laura. 2014. The diagrammatic dimension of William Gilbert’s De magnete. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 47: 18–25.
Gilbert, William. 1600. De Magnete, magneticisque corporibus, et de magno magnete tellure; Physiologia nova, plurimis & argumentis, & experimentis demonstrata. Londini: Excudebat Petrus Short.
Gilbert, William. 1651. De Mundo nostro sublunari philosophia nova. Amstelodami: Apud Ludovicum Elzevirium.
Gilbert, William. 1893. On the loadstone and magnetic bodies, and on the great magnet the earth. Trans. Paul Fleury Mottelay. New York: Dover Publications.
Henry, John. 2001. Animism and empiricism: copernican physics and the origins of William Gilbert’s experimental method. Journal of the History of Ideas 61(1): 99–119.
Hesse, Mary B. 1960a. Gilbert and the historians (I). British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 11(41): 1–10.
Hesse, Mary B. 1960b. Gilbert and the historians (II). British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 11(42): 130–142.
Jalobeanu, Dana. 2013. Learning from experiment: classification, concept formation and modeling in Francis Bacon’s experimental philosophy. Revue Roumaine de Philosophie 57(1): 75–93.
Jalobeanu, Dana. 2015a. The art of experimental natural history: Francis Bacon in context. Foundations of modernity. Bucharest: Zeta Books.
Jalobeanu, Dana. 2015b. Disciplining experience: Francis Bacon’s experimental series and the art of experimentation. Perspectives on Science 23 (forthcoming).
Kelly, Suzanne. 1965. The De Mundo of William Gilbert. Menno Hertzberger & Company.
Kepler, Johannes. 1992. New astronomy. Trans. William H Donahue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kodera, Sergius. 2014. The laboratory as stage: Giovan Battista della Porta’s experiments. Journal of Early Modern Studies 1: 15–38.
Krafft, Fritz. 1991. The new celestial physics of Johannes Kepler. In Physics, cosmology and astronomy, 1300–1700: Tension and accommodation, 185–227. Berlin: Springer.
Manzo, Silvia. 2006. Entre el atomismo y la alquimia. La teoria de la materia de Francis Bacon. Buenos Aires: Editorial Biblos.
Miller, David Marshall. 2014. Representing space in the scientific revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Parigi, Silvia. 2011. Gli effluvi, lo spirito del mondo e le cure magnetiche. Medicina & Storia 9(17–18): 179–199.
Porta, Giambattista della. 1589. Magia naturalis libri vingti. Napoli: Salviani.
Porta, Giambattista della. 1658. Natural magick in twenty books. London: Thomas Young and Samuel Speed.
Pumfrey, Stephen. 1989. Magnetical philosophy and astronomy, 1600–1650. The General History of Astronomy 2: 45–53.
Pumfrey, Stephen. 2002. William Gilbert. In Cambridge scientific minds, edited by Peter Harman, and Simon Mitton, 6–20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pumfrey, Stephen Philip. 1987. William Gilbert’s magnetic philosophy, 1580–1684: The creation and dissolution of a discipline. University of London.
Rabin, Sheila J. 2005. Was Kepler’s species immateriata substantial? Journal for the History of Astronomy 36: 49–56.
Rees, Graham. 1975a. Francis Bacon semi-paracelsian cosmology. Ambix 22: 81–101.
Rees, Graham. 1975b. Francis Bacon’s semi-paracelsian cosmology and the great instauration. Ambix 22: 161–173.
Rees, Graham. 1979. Francis Bacon on verticity and the bowels of the earch. Ambix 26(3): 202–211.
Rees, Graham. 1980. Atomism and subtlety in Francis Bacon’s philosophy. Annals of Science 37: 549–571.
Rees, Graham. 1996. Francis Bacon’s speculative philosophy. In Cambridge companion to Bacon, ed. Markku Peltonen, 121–145. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ridley, Mark. 1613. A short treatise of magneticall bodies and motions. London: Nicholas Okes.
Ridley, Mark. 1617. Magneticall animadversions … upon certaine magneticall advertisements lately published, from Maister W. Barlow. London.
Rusu, Doina-Cristina. 2013. From natural history to natural magic: Francis Bacon’s Sylva Sylvarum. PhD dissertation, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.
Stephenson, Bruce. 1994. Kepler’s physical astronomy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Ugaglia, Monica. 2006. The science of magnetism before Gilbert Leonardo Garzoni’s Treatise on the Loadstone. Annals of Science 63(1): 59–84.
Voelkel, James R. 2001. The composition of Kepler’s Astronomia nova. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Weeks, Sophie. 2007. Francis Bacon’s science of magic. Leeds: University of Leeds.
Acknowledgments
Research for this paper has been financed from the ERC Starting Grant Medicine of the Mind in Early Modern Europe: A New Interpretation of Francis Bacon and from the research grant PN-II-ID-PCE-2011-3-0719, From natural history to science. I would like to thank Koen Vermeir and Jonathan Regier, as well as the anonymous referees, for their helpful and useful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jalobeanu, D. (2016). ‘Borders,’ ‘Leaps’ and ‘Orbs of Virtue:’ A Contextual Reconstruction of Francis Bacon’s Extension-Related Concepts. In: Vermeir, K., Regier, J. (eds) Boundaries, Extents and Circulations. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol 41. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41075-3_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41075-3_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-41074-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-41075-3
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)