Natural Philosophy and the Origins of Modern Science
Course plan for 2015-2016
World-makers: early modern philosophers and their creation
Dana Jalobeanu
Guest speakers: Kirsten Walsh (post-doctoral fellow, Institute for Research in Humanities, University of
Bucharest), Michael Deckard (Fullbright Fellow, University of Bucharest)
Wednesday 14-18
This is a third year optional course designed for the students following the module of theoretical
philosophy (but other students, graduates or undergraduates are welcome to attend). The main aim of the
course is to discuss the major figures, ideas and debates of the scientific revolution. We will focus on
some of the important scientific and philosophical figures who contributed to the “scientific revolution”
of the sixteenth and seventeenth century. Here are some of the questions we are going to ask: What does it
mean to be a natural philosopher? Are there philosophical/scientific roles? Is natural philosophy a
profession, a vocation or a (Christian) duty? How many competing philosophical roles there are? Are
they fundamentally different (say: the Aristotelian and the proponents of the “new” philosophy). Do all
natural philosophers have something in common?
Our work hypothesis is that most of the proponents of the “new” natural philosophy (early modern
science) were world-makers: they aimed to replace the traditional view of the universe; they aimed to
reform the received knowledge, and sometimes also the received social and intellectual roles of
knowledge makers. Our discussion will focus on some primary texts. We will especially look for how
natural philosophers reflected on their public role when engaging in “world-making.” What did they
claim they were doing? How did they justify the attempt to replace the “old, received view of the world”
with a “new philosophy”?
The course will consist of one hour lecture and three hours of seminar. Course and seminars will mainly
consist of discussions. Each meeting will concentrate on two readings: a primary source and a secondary
source (supplementary reading material can be found in the associated folder in the common drop-box).
Each seminar will begin with a 20 minutes presentation of an author/representative figure of the scientific
revolution and will continue with a discussion of the texts. Students are required to write and prepare such
presentations (ppt. also required), trying to set the required readings in a historical context aiming to
facilitate de understanding.
Date Course and seminars
Readings
Introduction:
From
the
Scientific
07.10
Revolution
to
the
“scientific
revolutions”: historiographical debates.
Natural philosophy and early modern
science. The iconic figures of the
scientific revolution.
14.10 The cloister and the university: the
received view of the world (I)
14.10 Seminar: Historiographical biases and
the access to the primary sources
21.10 Teaching and learning natural
philosophy in the traditional setting.
What is natural philosophy before the
scientific revolution?
21.10 The cloister and the university: the
received view of the world (II)
Seminar
28.10 The public life and the contemplative
ideal of knowledge: Francis Bacon
28.10 Seminar: Francis Bacon
04.11 The Renaissance “mathematician” and
B.J.T. Dobbs, “The Janus Faces of Genius”
Reisch, Margarita philosophica (translation and
commentary by Cunningham and Kusukawa)
Francis Bacon, New Atlantis (also: Bacon’s letter to
Launcelot Andrewes on Seneca, Demosthene and
Cicero).
Secondary reading:
the “new world:” Astronomy, astrology
and practical mathematics from
Copernicus to Kepler
Omodeo, Chapter 2
04.11 Seminar: Johannes Kepler
11.11 Teaching the new science, from the
university to the court: Galileo Galilei,
mathematician and/or philosopher
Kepler, Astronomia nova, Introduction
Secondary reading: Biagioli, Galileo’s instruments of
credit, Introduction, Chapter 1
Supplementary reading:
11.11 Seminar: Galileo Galilei
Galileo Galilei, Dialogue on the two new world
systems, Day 1
Giovan Battista della Porta, Natural Magic,
introduction (the course will be organized as a reading
group too!!)
18.11 Natural magic and experimental
philosophy: Giovan Battista della Porta
and William Gilbert
18.11 Seminar: William Gilbert, experimental
philosophy and cosmology
William Gilbert, De magnete, book VI, ch. 1-3
Secondary reading: Freudenthal, Gilbert’s cosmology
Suppementary reading: Gatti, Giordano Bruno and the
Renaissance Science, chapter IV (Bruno and Gilbert’s
group)
24.11 The Christian virtuoso and the new
science in England. Robert Boyle and
the early Royal Society
24.11 Seminar: Robert Boyle, Christian
virtuoso
02.12 The first “professional”: Robert
Hooke’s experimental philosophy and
the Royal Society
02.12 Seminar: Robert Hooke
09.12 World makers: Descartes and Newton
09.12 Seminar: Descartes and Newton
Boyle, Christian virtuoso
Hooke, Micrographia (Preface)
Hooke, A general scheme…
Descartes, Le Monde (chapters 1, 6, 7)
Newton, De gravitatione
16.12 The private and the public face of the
natural philosopher: Newton
16.12 Seminar Newton
06.01 Utopia and the Royal Society:
Oldenburg, Evelyn, Wilkins, Beale on
the reformation of knowledge, the
advancement of learning and various
utopian ‘scientific’ projects
06.01 Seminar on the utopian plans of the
FRS
13.01 Communicators and promoters of the
new science. The public face of science
Dibner Ms 1031 b
Hypothesis on Light
Secondary reading: Lynch, Solomon’s Child
Henry Oldenburg – correspondence
RH – the continuation of New Atlantis
Cowley – the plan for organizing Royal Society
13.01 Women philosophers
20.01 Colloquium
Assignments
Seminar presentation: introduce the author (30% of the evaluation)
The seminar will begin with a 20 min presentation of the author whose text is under discussion.
Students are required to choose one author and to prepare such a presentation, focusing on the
context of the text for the seminar and the relevant details for its understanding. In introducing an
author it is important to emphasize what was his/her general plan/project and how does our
reading relate to that more general plan. Also, I would like to know more about the intellectual
context in which our author’s ideas have developed, about his intellectual sources, friends and
foes, about his successes (in his own time: was he read? Did he have students and followers?)
and failures (What did he hoped to achieve? How much did he manage to do? What prevented
him to do more? How did he/she reflect on the causes of his/her failure?). Try to reconstruct a
portrait as free as possible from the various biases of the various historiographies.
Analyze a primary source (from the bibliography) (30% of the evaluation)
Write a 4-6 pages ‘introduction’ to a primary source from the bibliography. Explain its main
ideas, define its terms, place it in the context (among the author’s other writings, for example),
provide the reader with the appropriate footnotes (definitions, explanations of terms, references
to the background etc.) and the running commentary that would help her understand the text
better. Show at what points in your analysis the reader might benefit from reading secondary
literature and why. What are the difficult problems this text is posing? What kind of problems
are they? (terminological, conceptual, contextual, interpretative) What do we need in order to
solve them? Draft a list of questions and a bibliography which might help the reader solve some
of these questions.
Discuss secondary literature referring to a primary source (30 % of the evaluation)
Select and discuss two secondary sources referring to the author/primary source you have worked on. Use
the bibliography and ask for help when you need it.