The Change in Mechanical Philosophy in the Scientific Revolution

Essay , 2009 , 9 Seiten , Note: A

Philosophie - Sonstiges

Since ancient Greece, philosophers have wondered how objects come into existence. Aristotle proposed that everything was made by one of four reasons or causes. The mechanical cause describes how the object is composed. For instance, the mechanical cause of a tire is rubber. The formal cause describes the plans or pattern of an object, like a blueprint for a house, while the efficient cause is the cause/effect relations of an object, like an artist’s paint and brushes resulting in painting a picture. The final cause, however, is defined as, "the purpose, the good, or the end of something." For example, the final cause of a folder is to store papers.

The Change in Mechanical Philosophy in the Scientific Revolution

Since ancient Greece, philosophers have wondered how objects come into existence. Aristotle proposed that everything was made by one of four reasons or causes. The mechanical cause describes how the object is composed. For instance, the mechanical cause of a tire is rubber. The formal cause describes the plans or pattern of an object, like a blueprint for a house, while the efficient cause is the cause/effect relations of an object, like an artist’s paint and brushes resulting in painting a picture. The final cause, however, is defined as, “the purpose, the good, or the end of something.” For example, the final cause of a folder is to store papers.^[1]

This final cause was rejected in the Scientific Revolution. It became increasingly difficult to justify the purpose or goal of an object using Aristotle’s philosophy. Scientists such as Descartes, Galileo, and Newton discounted the idea of the final cause and thought of the world as being made up of bodies of matter that could be described mathematically. This went against the previous view that nature was its own self-enclosed system and did not abide by the rules that governed people or objects. Descartes, Galileo, and Newton proposed that even nature followed rules and set out to prove the laws of physical science. This change in philosophy helped move the view of nature from being dominated by people’s beliefs, thoughts, or interpretations to being justified by set rules or laws. Therefore, the advancement in mechanical philosophy was the most profound change in the Scientific Revolution.

In ancient Greece, Aristotle sought out to solve the mystery of why objects behave the way they do. According to James McClellan, “Aristotle’s physics, and indeed all of Aristotle’s natural philosophy, is rightly said to represent the science of common sense.”^[2] Instead of focusing on the end result or answer, he focused on the purpose or use of objects. Aristotle sought to solve problems by answering the question of “because” to solve the questions of “why.”^[3] For example, Aristotle explains that, “Thus, a man is in fine condition “because” he has been training or he has been in training “because” of the good condition he expected as the results. But one is the cause as aim (final) and the other as initiating the process (efficient).”^[4] Aristotle also described the relationship between motion and nature. He proclaims that, “we must understand what ‘movement’ is; for if we do not know this, neither do we understand what nature is.”^[5] However, Aristotle proposed the idea that motion is different depending on where in space an object is located. For example, the motion on Earth is linear while the motion of objects in space, or in Aristotle’s case the heavens, are circular. This duality of physical observations, or motion being different for objects on Earth compared to the heavens, leaves a lasting impression for centuries to come. Aristotle’s observations of the physical world also lead him to propose connections between resistance, force, and velocity. He described a boat dragged on a beach. Since the boat cannot move by itself, an external force is required. If the force is greater than the frictional force, the boat will move.^[6] Similarly, in the case of falling motion, Aristotle noted that heavy objects would fall downwards faster than light objects. Furthermore, he postulated that the same object would fall more slowly in water than in air, and still slower in honey or in molten lead, where it may even float.^[7] However, over time Aristotle’s notion that all objects have a certain cause changed.

The advent of the medieval period and scientific universities saw many of Aristotle’s views of causation and the duality of motion in space contested. “The many different ways in which Aristotle’s works were read and interpreted in this period,” Michael Edwards explains, “owed a great deal to the structure and practices of university teaching.”^[8] The revival of Aristotle’s works allowed for institutions, which normally followed Aristotle’s teachings, to start questioning the ideas of Aristotelianism. Thomas Acquinas (1224-1274) sought to revive Aristotle’s teachings and, along with universities, explain the ideas of God, man, and nature.^[9] Although different from today, in medieval Europe, teachings of the church and school had to coexist. This is different from the religious freedom seen today. An intellectual battle ensued between the universities and the theologists. Aristotelianism taught that the world was eternal, that there was no creation, and that the human soul was not immortal.^[10] This lead to the Catholic Church issuing a condemnation of Aristotelian teachings in 1277. While some argue that the condemnation of 1277 was a major victory for theology, McClellan explains that, the condemnation freed medieval thinkers from the yoke of strict obedience to Aristotle. Nicole Oresme (1320-1382) took advantage of this new rule and devised hypothetical experiments or “suppositions” that were theologically inoffensive.^[11] In doing so, Oresme hypothesized a mathematical way of depicting motion that increases over time. He called it “uniformly difform motion”; today it is called constant acceleration.^[12] Another medieval scientist who brought critical review to Aristotelian science in the universities was Jean Buridan (1295-1358). In Aristotelian philosophy, an object in motion must be touching the mover at all times. Buridan questioned this idea by identifying cases where the mover was not obvious, such as when throwing a rock. Buridan then proposed an internal moving agent he called “impetus”. This force was the energy that drove projectiles after they lost contact with the mover.^[13] The idea of the “impetus” contrasted Aristotelian teachings that an object could not continue in motion unless a force is acting upon it. Buriden’s “impetus” gave the framework for Newton’s Law of Inertia; which states that an object at rest will stay at rest and an object in motion will stay in motion unless another force acts upon it.^[14]

[...]

---

^[1] Aristotle. 1929. The Physics. P. H. Wicksteed and F. M. Cornford (eds.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press, vol. 1, pp. 117.

^[2] James E. McClellan, Science and Technology in World History, (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006), 72.

^[3] Aristotle, in Brian S. Baigrie, ed, Scientific Revolutions: Primary Texts in the History of Science, (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pierson Education, 2004), 3.

^[4] Aristotle, in Baigrie, Scientific Revolutions, 4.

^[5] Aristotle, in Baigrie, Scientific Revolutions, 5.

^[6] McClellan, Science and Technology, 75.

^[7] McClellan, Science and Technology, 76.

^[8] Michael Edwards. (2007). "Aristotelianism, Descartes, and Hobbes." The Historical Journal 50 (2): 449-464.

^[9] McClellan, Science and Technology, 185.

^[10] McClellan, Science and Technology, 186-7.

^[11] McClellan, Science and Technology, 187.

^[12] Ulrich Taschow, Nicole Oresme und der Frühling der Moderne, Halle 2003, book 1, pages 142-143.

^[13] McClellan, Science and Technology, 190.

^[14] Newton, in Brian S. Baigrie, ed, Scientific Revolutions: Primary Texts in the History of Science, (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pierson Education, 2004), 143.

• Hochschule: Bucknell University
• Note: A
• Autor: Matt Segar (Autor:in)
• Erscheinungsjahr: 2009
• Seiten: 9
• Katalognummer: V210743
• ISBN (eBook): 9783668708334
• ISBN (Buch): 9783668708341
• Sprache: Englisch
• Schlagworte: change, mechanical, philosophy, scientific, revolution