Philosophy Archives – A Vue From Here

Portrait of Nicolaus Copernicus, exhibited at the Toruń Museum–public domain image, via Wikimedia Commons.

In this blog and elsewhere, you have probably already seen the expression “Copernican revolution”. This expression highlights the fact that Nicolaus Copernicus (1473 – 1543) provoked a major change in perspectives by showing that it is more relevant to consider this is the Earth that is rotating around the Sun rather than the opposite. To this first upheaval echoes Galileo Galilei’s (1564 – 1642) works. The latter, on the basis of Copernicus’ work, among others, has definitively shown that Claudius Ptolemy’s (around 90 AD – about 168) system, published in the Almagest¹Κλαύδιος Πτολεμαῖος, around 150 AD. Μαθηματική σύνταξις. An English translation: Gerald J. Toomer, 1998. Ptolemy’s Almagest, second edition, Princeton University Press, New York, United States of America. Available on-line. and according to which, in agreement with Aristotelian physics, the Earth was motionless in the centre of the World, was wrong.

I have already presented this, with a view from here. As I have indicated before, they were both preceded by Nicole Oresme’s (about 1320 or 1322 – 1382) work. Galileo also used Johannes Kepler’s (1571 – 1630) work, among others. Therefore, I have intentionally used the expression “Copernican revolution,” as well as “epistemic revolution.” But still remains the question I would like to tackle in this article: though this expression is commonly used, is it really relevant to talk about revolution? My purpose is also to lead you, my dear reader, to make some critical analysis of what I am publishing here.

Continue reading Did Copernicus really made the (scientific) revolution?

Notes[+]

Notes
↑1	Κλαύδιος Πτολεμαῖος, around 150 AD. Μαθηματική σύνταξις. An English translation: Gerald J. Toomer, 1998. Ptolemy’s Almagest, second edition, Princeton University Press, New York, United States of America. Available on-line.

Guillaume d’Ockham — William of Ockham, sketch from manuscript *Summa Logicae* (William of Ockham, 1323) – public domain image *via* Wikimedia Commons.

The law of parsimony – sometimes called Ockham’s razor after the English Franciscan monk William of Ockham (circa 1285 – 1347), a pioneer in logic – is a principle common to philosophy and science. In fact, it has been stated before, the oldest occurrence that I have found is due to Aristotle¹Ἀριστοτέλης, Φυσικὴ ἀκρόασις. Available on-line. An English translation by Robin Waterfield: David Bostock (editor), 1999. Physics, Oxford University Press. Available on-line. (384 – 322 BC), who attributes it to Empedocles (circa 490 – about 435 BC). However, Proclus (412 AD – 485) traces it back to Pythagoras (about 580 – about 495 BC)²The only version I know of the work in question is this German edition, which appears to be considered the reference: Manitius, C. (éditor et translator), 1909. Procli Diadochi hypotyposis astronomicarum positionum (Bibliotheca scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana), Teubner, Leipzig. Reprinted in 1974: Teubner, Stuttgart..

This principle is not always well understood, as it is sometimes used in a manner denoting a misunderstanding about what it actually means. I propose you to see a brief history of this law before commenting on what it means. This article is therefore one of the series on history of science and popularisation I started with a view from here.

No, I have not yet specified what states this law. This is a barely honest process that aims to create an almost unbearable suspense to make you captive of my prose, so that you will read this whole article. However, do not worry: the explanation comes in a few lines!

Continue reading William had a good razor!

Notes[+]

Notes
↑1	Ἀριστοτέλης, Φυσικὴ ἀκρόασις. Available on-line. An English translation by Robin Waterfield: David Bostock (editor), 1999. Physics, Oxford University Press. Available on-line.
↑2	The only version I know of the work in question is this German edition, which appears to be considered the reference: Manitius, C. (éditor et translator), 1909. Procli Diadochi hypotyposis astronomicarum positionum (Bibliotheca scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana), Teubner, Leipzig. Reprinted in 1974: Teubner, Stuttgart.