HPS 210F Scientific Revolutions
Essay 2 Sources
Essay # 1: Galileo and the Church
 Useful places to get references to primary sources:
- Richard S. Westfall, “The Trial of Galileo: Bellarmino, Galileo, and the Clash of Two
Worlds”, Journal for the History of Astronomy, Vol. 20, Part 1, February 1989: 1-23.
- Olaf Pedersen, “Galileo and the Council of Trent: The Galileo Affair Revisited”,
Journal for the History of Astronomy, Vol. 14, Part 1, No. 39, February 1983: 1-29.
- Mario Biagioli, “The Social Status of Italian Mathematics, 1450-1600”, History of
Science, Vol. 27, Part 1, No. 75, March 1989: 41-95.
 Useful secondary sources:
- John A. Schuster, “Galileo and the Catholic Church”, in D. Turnbull (ed), Knowledge
Making, 1985.
- E Gosselin and L. S. Lerner, “Galileo and the long shadow of Bruno,” Archives
Internationales D’Histoire Descartes Sciences, Vol. 25, 1975: 223-46.
- Mario Biagioli, “Galileo the emblem maker,” Isis, 81 (1990): 230-258.
- J. Langford, Galileo, Science and the Church, pp.50-158.
- Robert S. Westman, “The Astronomer’s Role in the Sixteenth Century: A Preliminary
Study”, History of Science, Vol. 18, Part 1, No. 39, March 1980: 105-147.
- I. Bernard Cohen, “Kepler, Gilbert, and Galileo: A Revolution in the Physical
Sciences?”, Revolution in Science (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University
Press, 1985): 126-145.
- Eileen Reeves, “Old Wives’ Tales and the New World System: Gilbert, Galileo, and
Kepler,” Configurations, Vol. 7, No. 3, 1999: 301-354.
- Arkady Plotnitsky and David Reed, “Discourse, Mathematics, Demonstration, and
Science in Galileo’s Discourses Concerning Two New Sciences”, Configurations, Vol. 9,
No. 1, 2001: 37-64.
 Some Galileo scholars:
- Rivka Feldhay (see Descartes suggestions), Ludovico Geymonat, William Shea, J
Broderick, Mario Biagioli
- Stillman Drake has edited and made available many Galileo texts
Basic accounts of Galileo’s work as a Copernican theorist and propagandist:
- T. S. Kuhn, The Copernican Revolution, pp.219-228.
- Brian Easlea, Witch-Hunting, Magic and the New Philosophy, pp.75-87.
- Paul Feyerebend, Against Method, pp.98-107, 122-139 esp. 122-126.
- Arthur Koestler, The Sleepwalkers, pp.363-375.
- Michael Sharratt, Galileo, Decisive Innovator (Oxford: Blackwell 1994).
1
Essay #2: Descartes
 Useful places to get references to primary sources:
- John Cottingham (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Descartes (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1992), esp. Nicholas Jolley, “The Reception of Descartes’
Philosophy”, in pp. 393-423.
- Elizabeth Anscombe and Peter Geach, Descartes: Philosophical Writings (1971)
- A. Kenny, Descartes: Philosophical Letters (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970).
- E. Haldane and G. Ross, Philosophical Works of Descartes (1931)
- Thomas More, A Collection of Several Philosophical Writings (2nd edition, 1662)
- Charles Adam and Gerard Milhaud (eds.), Descartes: Correspondence (8 vols)
- L. Loemker, Critical Remarks Concerning Descartes’ Principles
- A. J. Holland (ed.), Philosophy: Its History and Historiography (1985)
- Charles Schmitt (ed.), Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy (1988)
 Useful secondary source introductions to the “Descartes industry”
- John A. Schuster, “Descartes Agonistes: New Tales of Cartesian Natural Philosophy”,
Perspectives on Science, Vol. 3, No. 1, 1995: 99-145.
- Roger Ariew, “Damned If You Do: Cartesians and Censorship, 1663-1706”,
Perspectives on Science, Vol. 2, No. 3, 1994: 255-274.
- Norman J. Wells, “Descartes’ Uncreated Eternal Truths,” New Scholasticism, 56
(1982): 185-99.
- Alan Kors, Atheism and Learning in Early Modern France: 1650-1729.
- Mary B. Hesse, “Action at a Distance”, in E. McMullin (ed.), The concept of matter in
modern philosophy (Notre dame and London, 1963): 119-37.
 On God and Nature: USEFUL FOR ESSAY # 2, 3, 4, AND 5
- William B. Ashworth, Jr., “Light of Reason, Light of Nature: Catholic and Protestant
Metaphors of Scientific Revolution,” Science in Context, Vol. 3, No. 1, 1989: 89-107.
- William B. Ashworth, Jr., “Catholicism and Early Modern Science,” in David C.
Lindberg and Ronald L. Numbers (eds.), God and Nature: Historical Essays on the
Encounters between Christianity and Science (Berkeley: University of California Press,
1986), 136-166.
- Rivka Feldhay, “Knowledge and Salvation in Jesuit Culture,” Science in Context, 1
(1987): 195-213.
- Michael Hunter, “The Problem of ‘Atheism’ in Early Modern England,” Transactions
of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 35 (1985): 135-57.
- Michael Hunter, “Science and Heterodoxy: An Early Modern Problem Reconsidered,”
in David C. Lindberg and Robert S. Westman (eds.), Reappraisals of the Scientific
Revolution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 437-460.
- Descartes scholars: Alan Gabbey, Gary C. Hatfield, Daniel Garber, John A. Schuster,
Stephen Gaukroger, Nicholas Jolley, Stephen Voss, Amelie Rorty, Genevieve RodisLewis, Richard Popkin, J. F. Scott, Richard S. Westfall, Margaret Wilson, Desmond M.
Clark, William Shea, Peter Machamer, Martial Gueroult, E. J. Aiton, Norman Kemp
Smith, Leon Pearl, J. E. McGuire.
2
Sources for Essay 3, 4, and 5
 On occult qualities:
- Keith Hutchison, “What Happened to Occult Qualities in the Scientific Revolution?”,
Isis, Vol. 73, No. 267, June 1982: 233-53.
- Keith Hutchison, “Supernaturalism and the Mechanical Philosophy,” History of
Science, 21 (1983): 297-333.
- Simon Schaffer, “Occultism and Reason”, in A. J. Holland (ed.), Philosophy, its History
and Historiography (Dordrecht, 1985): 117-43.
- Brian P. Copenhaver, “Natural Magic, Hermeticism, and Occultism in Early Modern
Science,” in David C. Lindberg and Robert S. Westman (eds.), Reappraisals of the
Scientific Revolution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 261-301.
- Brian Vickers, “Introduction” to Brian Vickers (ed.), Occult and Scientific Mentalities
in the Renaissance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 1-55.
 The Mechanical Philosophy:
- Alan Gabbey, “The Mechanical Philosophy and its Problems: Mechanical Explanations,
Impenetrability, and Perpetual Motion”, in J. C. Pitt (ed), Change and Progress in
Modern Science (Dordrecht: 1985): 9-84.
- R. W. Home, “Newton’s subtle matter: the Opticks queries and the mechanical
philosophy,” in J. V. Field and Frank A. J. L. James (eds.), Renaissance and Revolution:
Humanists, craftsmen and natural philosophers in early modern Europe (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1993).
- Peter Alexander, “The Case of the Lonely Corpuscle: Reductive Explanation and
primitive Expressions,” in Richard Healey (ed.), Reduction, Time and Reality
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), 17-35.
- Peter Alexander, Ideas, Qualities and Corpuscles: Locke and Boyle on the external
World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985)
 On ‘Natural Philosophy’:
- Simon Schaffer, “Natural Philosophy,” in George S. Rousseau and Roy Porter (eds.),
The Ferment of Knowledge: Studies in the Historiography of Eighteenth-Century Science
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 55-91.
- Margeret J. Osler and P. L. Farber (eds.), Religion, Science and Worldview: Essays in
Honour of Richard S. Westfall (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985).
- Simon Schaffer, “Making Certain”, review of Barbara Shapiro, Probability and
Certainty in Seventeenth-Century England, in Social Studies of Science, 14 (1984): 137152.
- Peter Dear, “Totius in verba: Rhetoric and Authority in the Early Royal Society,” Isis,
76 (1985): 145-161.
- Betty Jo Teeter Dobbs & Margaret C. Jacob, Newton & the Culture of Newtonianism
3
 Did Newton’s interest in alchemy stem from his efforts to understand the active
principles in matter?:
- J. E. McGuire and P. M. Rattansi, “Newton and the ‘Pipes of Pan’”, Notes and Records
of the Royal Society, Vol. 21 (1966): 108-43.
- J. E. McGuire, “Force, Active Principles and Newton’s Invisible Realm”, Ambix, xv
(1968): 154-208, esp. at p.166. Suggestion first made here.
- P. M. Rattansi, “Newton’s Alchemical Studies”, in A. G. Debus (ed.), Science,
Medicine, and Society in the Renaissance (NY: 1972): 167-82.
- R. S. Westfall, “Newton and the Hermetic Tradition”, in A. G. Debus (ed.), Science,
Medicine, and Society in the Renaissance (NY: 1972): 183-93.
- R. S. Westfall, “The Role of Alchemy in Newton’s Career”, in M. L. Righini Bonelli
and W. R. Shea (eds.), Reason, Experiment and Mysticism in the Scientific Revolution
(NY: Science History Publications, 1975): 189-232.
- B. J. T. Dobbs, “Newton’s Alchemy and his Theory of Matter”, Isis, lxxii (1982): 51128.
- R. S. Westfall, “Newton and Alchemy”, in Brian Vickers (ed.), Occult and Scientific
Mentalities in the Renaissance (Cambridge, 1984): 315-35.
 On the influence of Cambridge Platonism:
- J. E. McGuire, “Neoplatonism and Active Principles: Newton and the Corpus
Hermeticum”, in R. S. Westman and J. E. McGuire, Hermeticism and the Scientific
Revolution (LA: 1977): 95-142.
 Newton v. Leibniz:
- Steven Shapin, “Of Gods and Kings: Natural Philosophy and Politics in the LeibnizClarke Disputes,” Isis, 72 (1981): 187-215.
- Thomas Hankins, “Eighteenth century attempts to resolve the vis viva controversy,”
Isis, lvi (1965): 281-297.
- Carolyn Iltis, “The Leibnizian-Newtonian Debates: Natural Philosophy and Social
Psychology,” The British Journal for the History of Science, Vol. 6, Part 4, No. 24,
December 1973: 343-377.
- Carolyn Iltis, “Leibniz and the Vis Viva Controversy,” Isis, Vol. 62, Part 1, No. 211,
Spring 1971: 21-35.
 From the ‘biological’ realm:
- Andrew Pyle, “Animal Generation and the Mechanical Philosophy: Some Light on the
Role of Biology in the Scientific Revolution”, History and Philosophy of the Life
Sciences, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1987: 225-54.
- Catherine Wilson, The Invisible World: Early Modern Philosophy and the Invention of
the Microscope (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995).
- Edward G. Ruestow, “Piety and the Defence of the National Order: Swammerdam on
Generation”, in M. J. Osler and P. L. Farber (eds), Religion, Science and Worldview:
Essays in Honour of Richard S. Westfall (1985), pp. 217-39.
- Neal C. Gillispie, “Natural Order, Natural Theology and Social Order: John Ray and the
‘Newtonian Ideology,’” Journal of the History of Biology, 20 (1987): 1-49
4