Abstract
The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy was written at a particular time by a unique individual, Isaac Newton, who had a unique background and character. But when physicists evaluate what is found in that great work, they do not care about its unique authorship but only about its truth, the truth of some of its logical consequences, the ability to extend its doctrines to new domains, and so on. How Newton arrived at his theories is a question, one might say, in the context of discovery. The matter of judging the truth or falsity of Newton’s claims belongs to the context of justification. That Newton liked to work late into the night, or that he supported William of Orange, has little to do with the truth of his doctriness and should not affect our judgement of their truth.
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
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography
Cohen, I. B.: 1974, ‘Newton’s Theory versus Kepler’s Theory and Galileo’s Theory: An example of a difference between a philosophical and a historical analysis of science’, in Y. Elkana (ed.), The Interaction Between Science and Philosophy, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, pp. 299–338.
Duhem, P.: 1914, The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory, reprinted in English translation by P. Wiener, Antheneum, New York, 1962. Page references are to the English edition.
Feyerabend, P.: 1975, Against Method, NLB, London.
Geymonat, L.: 1965, Galileo Galilei, English translation by S. Drake, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Hattiangadi, J. N.: 1978, The Structure of Problems’, Philosophy of the Social Sciences 8, 345–365, and 9, 49–76.
Hattiangadi, J. N.: 1980, ‘Three Contemporary Methodologies of Science and a Methodology without Methodological Rules’, forthcoming in R. S. Cohen and M. Wartofsky (eds.), Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.
Koestler, A.: 1959, The Sleepwalkers, MacMillan, London.
Koyré, A.: 1978, Galilean Studies, English translation by J. Metham, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey.
Newton, I.: 1962, Newton’s Principia, Motte translation, revised by F. Cajori, Univ. of California Press, Berkeley, 2 vols.
Popper, K. R.: 1957, The Aim of Science’, Ratio 1, 24–35, reprinted in Objective Knowledge, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, pp. 191–205. Page references are to this reprint.
Popper, K. R.: 1959, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Basic Books, New York.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1980 D. Reidel Publishing Company
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hattiangadi, J.N. (1980). The Vanishing Context of Discovery: Newton’s Discovery of Gravity. In: Nickles, T. (eds) Scientific Discovery, Logic, and Rationality. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol 56. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8986-3_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8986-3_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-277-1070-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-8986-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive