LECTURE Lecture 16: The Mechanical Philosophy I. Gassendi's Alternative Mechanical Philosophy A. Pierre Gassendi (1592-1655) B. His Christianized Atomism II. Science, Magic, and Religion A. Magic, Mechanical Arts, and Mechanical Philosophy B. 'Occult Qualities' in Aristotelian Philosophy C. Malinowski, Thomas, Mersenne D. Elite versus Popular III. From Renaissance to Rebellion (and Disenchantment) A. In Praise of Novelty B. A 'New Method' for the 'New Science' C. A New Image & New Ideology of Scientific Knowledge (3/20) [References: Boas 1952; Eamon 1983; Henry 1986; Horton 1970; Houghton 1942; Hutchison 1982; Hutchison 1983; Mendelsohn 1977; Millen 1985; Schuster 1990; Thorndike 1951; Webster 1982] I. GASSENDI'S ALTERNATIVE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY A. PIERRE GASSENDI (1592-1655) I SPOKE LAST TIME ABOUT THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY OF RENÉ DESCARTES HE BELIEVED THAT HE WAS ABLE TO ERECT A SYSTEM OF NATURE BASEDON A VERY SPARSELY POPULATED ONTOLOGY; NAMELY, FIRST, SECOND,AND THIRD MATTER; VORTICES; RECTALINEAR INERTIA, AND CONSERVATION OF MOTION BY RELYING ON STRICTLY MECHANICAL INTERACTIONS; THAT IS, ON THEMOTIONS, COLLISIONS, AND VIBRATIONS OF MATTER, DESCARTES BELIEVES HE IS ABLE TO CONSTRUCT EXPLANATIONS FOR ALL THE PHENOMENA OF THE NATURAL WORLD AND BY REDUCING NATURE TO ITS GEOMETRIC ESSENCE -- THAT IS, TO JUST THOSE PROPERTIES THAT CAN BE REPRESENTED GEOMETRICALLY -- DESCARTES HAS ACHIEVED WHAT HE SET OUT TO DO; CONSTRUCT A NATURAL PHILOSOPHY BASED ON CERTAIN KNOWLEDGE I ALSO SUGGESTED THAT THE ESSENTIALS OF HIS NATURAL PHILOSOPHYCOULD BE REDUCED TO THREE BASIC CHARACTERISTICS: 1) FIRST, HE BELIEVED THAT ALL NATURAL PHENOMENA COULD BE REDUCED TO MATTER IN MOTION 2) SECOND, ALL CAUSATION MUST OCCUR THOUGH CONTACT BETWEENMATERIAL BODIES -- IN OTHER WORDS, THERE CAN BE NO OCCULT, OR HIDDEN, AGENCIES IN NATURE THE ONLY FORM OF EXPLANTION ACCEPTABLE TO DESCARTES IS ONE THAT RESTS ON CLEAR AND DISTINCT IDEAS OF THE GEOMETER 3) THIRD, THERE EXISTS A FUNDAMENTAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY QUALITIES AND IC ONCLUDED BY STATING THAT ONE COULD REJECT VIRTUALLY ALL THE DETAILS OF DESCARTES MECHANICAL EXPLANATIONS AND STILLBE A MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHER BY ADHERING TO THESE THREE POINTS AN EXAMPLE OF AN ALTERNATIVE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY COMES FROM A FRENCHMAN AND CONTEMPORARY OF DESCARTES, NAMED PIERRE GASSENDI GASSENDI WAS BORN IN 1592 IN SOUTHERN FRANCE, THUS MAKING HIM ONLY 4 YEARS OLDER THAN DESCARTES HE WAS ALSO EDUCATED BY JESUITS, WAS A CHILD PRODIGY, AND ADVANCED THROUGH THE ACADEMIC SYSTEM SO RAPIDLY THAT HE RECEIVED HIS DOCTORATE IN THEOLOGY FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF AVIGNON AT THE AGE OF 22 -- THE MORE TYPICAL AGE WAS AROUNF 35 IN 1616 HE TOOK HOLY ORDERS AND BECAME A SECULAR PRIEST -THAT IS, HE WAS A CLERIC BUT UNATTACHED TO ANY FORMAL RELIGIOUS ORDER FROM 1617 UNTIL 1623, GASSENDI WAS A TEACHER OF PHILOSOPHY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF AIX-EN-PROVENCE IN SOUTHERN FRANCE B. HIS CHRISTIANIZED ATOMISM IN THE COURSE OF HIS STUDIES, GASSENDI BECAME FASCINATED WITH THE THEORIES OF THE ANCIENT GREEK ATOMISTS AS A MATURE AND ERUDITE SCHOLAR, GASSENDI SET OUT TO REVIVE AND MODIFY ANCIENT ATOMISM AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO HERMETICISM LIKE DESCARTES, GASSENDI DISLIKED THE HEREMTIC PHILOSOPHER'S UNSATISFYING RECOURSE TO OCCULT POWERS AND HIDDEN FORCES TO EXPLAIN THE WORKINGS OF NATURE THE DETAILS OF GREEK ATOMISM HAD BEEN AVALIABLE IN EUROPE FORAT LEAST 150 YEARS PRIOR TO GASSENDI'S WORK, BUT ITS ACCEPTANCE AS A GENERAL NATURAL PHILOSOPHY HAD BEEN IMPEDED BY TWO OBSTACLE 1) FIRST, ARISTOTLE HAD CAREFULLY SUMMARIZED AND ROUNDLY CONDEMNED THE IDEAS OF DEMOCRITUS, THE BEST-KNOWN OF THE ANCIENT GREEK ATOMISTS 2) THE THE ATOMIC THEORY WAS THOROUGHLY MATERIALISTIC AND THUS CARRIED WITH IT THE STIGMA OF ATHEISM THE ANCIENT GREEK ATOMISTS HAD NO PLACE FOR GREEK GODS IN THEIR UNIVERSE; THERE EXISTED FOR THEM ONLY ATOMS, THE VOID, ANDMOTION AND A NATURAL PHILOSOPHY THAT HAD NO PLACE FOR SPIRITUAL ENTITIES WAS WHOLLY UNACCEPTABLE TO CHRISTIAN SCHOLARS AND, THOUGH WESTERN SCHOLARS KNEW OF GREEK ATOMISM THROUGH THE NEGATIVE ACCOUNTS OF ARISTOTLE FROM THE 13TH CENTURY ONWARD, ALMOST NO PHILOSOPHER HAD EVER TRIED TO EMPLOY ATOMISM AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO ARISTOTELIAN MATTER THEORY BUT GASSENDI CLEARLY SAW THE POTENTIAL OF ATOMISM AS A SYSTEMOF MECHANICAL EXPLANATION AND SOUGHT TO REMOVE THE TAINT OFATHEISM GASSENDI SUCCEEDS IN 'CHRISTIANIZING' ANCIENT ATOMISM BY MAKING THE CHRISTIAN GOD THE CREATOR OF ATOMS, THUS DENYING THE ANCIENT PREMISE THAT ATOMS ARE UNCREATED AND ETERNAL IN HIS VIEW, THE EXISTENCE OF ATOMS IN THE ABSENCE OF GOD IS IMPOSSIBLE AND, NOT SUPRISINGLY, HE ADDS TO THE STARK ONTOLOGY OF ATOMISM, THE EXISTENCE OF A NON-MATERIAL SUBSTANCE, THE HUMANSOUL ALTHOUGH THIS MAY NOT BE A PROFOUND RE-WORKING OF ANCIENT ATOMISM, IT IS SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE IT GIVES ATOMISTIC IDEAS A CURRENCY AND LEGITIMACY THEY DID NOT PREVIOUSLY POSSESS WHAT ESPECIALLY APPEALED TO GASSENDI, WAS THE POSSIBLITY OF USING ATOMISM TO WORK OUT STRICTLY MECHANICAL EXPLANATIONS OFNATURAL PHENOMENA IN THIS SENSE, BOTH GASSENDI AND DESCARTES WERE PURSUING THE SAME ENDS; AND IN GENERAL THEY AGREED UPON THE THREE POINTS MENTIONED EARLIER HOWEVER, GASSENDI DENIED SEVERAL OF THE BASIC ELEMENTS OF THECARTESIAN MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY 1) FIRST, HE DID NOT ACCEPT THE IDENTITY OF MATTER AND EXTENSION 2) SECOND, HE REJECTED THE PLENUM AND ALSO THE VORTICES 3) AND THIRD, HE DENIED THAT MATTER WAS INFINITELY DIVISIBLE IN OTHER WORDS, HE ACCEPTED THE FUNDAMENTAL PRECEPT OF ATOMIC THEORY; THAT THE SMALLEST CHUNKS OF MATTER, ATOMS, ARE A PRIORI INDIVISIBLE NOW GASSENDI'S ATOMS, LIKE THE ATOMS OF DEMOCRITUS, WERE TINY IMMUTABLE PIECES OF MATTER OF VARIOUS SHAPES AND SIZES THEY POSSES ONLY THE PROPERTIES OF SHAPE, HARDNESS, IMPENETRABILITY, AND INDIVISIBILITY ALTHOUGH THE ATOMS THEMSELVES ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY PHYSICAL CHANGE EXCEPT CHANGE OF PLACE -- THAT IS, THEY MOVE -, THEIR CONFIGURATIONS AND MOTIONS ACCOUNT FOR ALL THE PHENOMENA OF THE NATURAL WORLD UNLIKE DESCARTES' SWIRLING MASS OF MATTER, GASSENDI'S ATOMS MOVE IN A VOID: AN INFINITELY EXTENDED, THREE-DIMENSIONAL, PERFECTLY EMPTY EUCLIDEAN SPACE VOID SPACE EXISTS WHETHER OR NOT ANYTHING RESIDES 'IN' IT INDEED, GASSENDI OFFERS ONE OF THE FIRST STATEMENTS OF WHAT, INTHE MIND OF NEWTON, WOULD BE COME TO BE CALLED ABSOLUTE TIME AND ABSOLUTE SPACE FOR BOTH GASSENDI AND NEWTON, SPACE POSSESSED AN EXISTENCE QUITE INDEPENDENT OF THE EVENTS THAT OCCUR WITHIN IT GASSENDI COULD EXPLAIN THE VARYING DEGREES OF HARDNESS, SOFTNESS, AND DENSITY OF OBJECTS IN THE NATURAL WORLD THROUGHAPPROPRIATE MIXTURES OF ATOMS OF VARIOUS SHAPES AND THE VOID SPACE BETWEEN ATOMS REMEMBER, ONE OF THE OBJECTIONS I RAISE AGAINST CARTESIAN MATTER THEORY WAS THAT IT IS DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND HOW ANY COMBINATION OF CARTESIAN MATTER (FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD) CAN ACCOUNT FOR OBJECTS OF DIFFERENT DENSITIES SINCE ALL THREE TYPESOF MATTER ARE OF THE SAME DENSITY INDEED, TO GASSENDI'S WAY OF THINKING, THE VERY ACT OF MOTION INTHE CARTESIAN WORLD IN IMPOSSIBLE FOR IN ORDER TO MOTION TO COMMENCE IN THE CARTESIAN PLENUM ALL THE MATTER IN THE UNIVERSE WOULD HAVE TO BEGIN MOVING AT EXACTLY THE SAME INSTANT -- AND THAT WOULD REQUIRE AN ABSURDLYLARGE INITIAL FORCE MOTION IN THE ATOMIC WORLD IS EASY SINCE ATOMS MOVE EFFORTLESSLY THROUGH A NON-RESISTING VOID SPACE AT A MORE MUNDANE LEVEL OF EXPLANATION, GASSENDI CAN EXPLAINWHY IT IS THAT ADDING SALT TO A GLASS OF WATER DOES NOT RAISE THE LEVEL OF THE WATER IT IS BECAUSE THE ATOMS OF SALT SETTLE INTO THE EMPTY SPACES BETWEEN THE ATOMS THAT MAKE UP THE WATER HOW CAN DESCARTES EXPLAIN THIS? IN HIS WORLD, THERE ARE NO PLACES FOR THE SALT TO HIDE IN THE WATER BY POSTULATING ATOMS OF VARIOUS SIZES AND SHAPES, AND BY ARRANGING THEM ACORDING TO VARIOUS SPATIAL CONFIGURATIONS, GASSENDI CAN EXPLAIN A WIDE RANGE OF PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPOERTIES OPAGUE AND RIGID OBJECTS RESULT FROM PACKING ATOMS CLOSELY TOGETHER AND GIVING THEM SHAPES THAT ALLOW THEM TO INTERLOCK,LIKE PIECES OF A JIG-SAW PUZZLE SOUR TASTING FOODS ARE COMPOSED OF SHARP, POINTED ATOMS; SWEET FOODS FROM SMOOTH, SPHERICAL ATOMS ONE COULD EASILY MULTIPLY EXAMPLES, BUT THERE IS NO NEED; I THINK GASSENDI'S PRINCIPLE OF EXPLANATION IS CLEAR GASSENDI MUST ESTABLISH A ONE-TO-ONE CORRESPONDENCE BETWEENA DATUM OF SENSE-EXPERIENCE AND A CERTAIN GEOMETRIC PROPERTYOR CONFIGURATION OF ATOMS HIS EXPLANATIONS ARE SIMPLY THE IDENTIFICATION OF A ATOM OF A PARTICULAR SHAPE -- OR GROUP OF ATOMS OF A PARTICULAR CONFIGURATION -- WITH A PARTICULAR PHENOMENON OR SENSATION YET EXACTLY HOW THE SHAPES AND CONFIGURATIONS OF ATOMS GIVE RISE TO SENSATION IS NEVER DIRECTLY ADDRESSED AND SINCE OUR SENSATIONS CONSIST OF SECONDARY QUALITIES AND THE ATOMS THEMSELVES OF PRIMARY QUALITIES, IT WOULD SEEM THAT WE ARE PERMANENTLY CUT OFF FROM THE WORLD OF ESSENCES INDEED, THIS IS ONE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL CONCLUSIONS THAT GASSENDI HIMSELF ACCEPTED THERE IS A DEFINITE LIMIT TO THE ABILITY OF THE HUMAN MIND TO APPREHEND ULTIMATE REALITY HE ADMITS THAT HE DOES NOT KNOW WHAT THE ESSENCE OF MATTER IS;HE CLAIMS TO BE ABLE TO APPREHEND SOME OF ITS PROPERTIES, BUT HEDOES NOT PRETEND TO KNOW ESSENCES THE HUMAN MIND, IN GASSENDI'S VIEW, IS INCAPABLE OF PENETRATINGTO THE UNDERLYING REALITY CONTRAST THIS, FOR A MOMENT, WITH DESCARTES' CLAIMS FOR DESCARTES, MATTER IS EXTENSION, THUS HE BELIEVES THAT HE UNDERSTANDS THE VERY ESSENCE OF MATTER INDEED, IT WAS PRECISLE BECAUSE THE EQUATION, MATTER = EXTESNION, PRESENTED ITSELF CLEARLY AND DISTINCTLY TO HIS MIND THAT HE KNOWS IT IS TRUE AND IT IS UPON THIS INDUBITIBLE AXIOM THAT HE IS ABLE TO CONSTRUCT A COMPLETE NATURAL PHILOSOPHY FOUNDED UPON CERTAIN KNOWLEDGE GASSENDI DENIED THE TRUTH OF THAT EQUATION AND THUS FOR HIM ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY CANNOT BE ACHIEVED HE HAS ACCEPTED, AT LEAST PARTIALLY, THE CONCLUSIONS OF SKEPTICISM; OR MORE PRECISELY, HE HAS ACCEPTED WHAT HAS BEEN CALLED "MITIGATED SKEPTICISM" THE TENETS OF MITIGATED SKEPTICISM MAINTAIN THAT THE QUEST FORCERTAINTY IS DOOMED TO FAILURE BUT GASSENDI DOES NOT GIVE UP THE QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE ALTOGETHER, AS THE EXTREME SKEPTIC WOULD IN THE ABSENCE OF THE CERTAINTY OF RATIONAL KNOWLEDGE, SENSE PERCEPTIONS TAKE ON A NEW IMPORTANCE ALTHOUGH THE SENSE MAY NOT BE INFALLIBLE, THEY ARE THE BEST ACCESS WE HAVE TO THE PROPERTIES OF NATURE, AND SO WE MUST USE THEM CAREFULLY AND ALTHOUGH SENSE PERCEPTIONS CANNOT LEAD US TO THE ESSENCEOF NATURE -- TO THE UNDERLYING REALITY -- THEY CAN PROVIDE US WITH SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO GAIN A USEFUL UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORKINGS OF NATURE THUS GASSENDI IS NOT ONLY POSULATING A NEW ATOMIC THEORY, HE IS ALSO POSTULATING A NEW GOAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC ENTERPRISE GASSENDI WRITES: THE SOUNDING LINE OF MAN'S REASON IS MUCH TOO SHORT TO [PLUMB]THE DEPTHS OF THAT IMMENSE OCEAN, NATURE. . . . IT CANNOT [EVEN] ATTAIN TO THE BOTTOM OF HER SHALLOWS. . . . FOR IN AS MUCH AS THE TRUE IDEA OF NATURE IS PROPERLY KNOWN ONLY TO THE ETERNAL INTELLECT, WHICH FIRST CONCEIVED IT; IT CANNOT BE BUT ONE OF THE HIGHEST DEGREES OF MADNESS FOR DULL AND UNEQUAL MAN TO PRETEND TO AN EXACT OR ADEQUATE COMPREHENSION THEREOF" INSTEAD OF PLUMBING THE DEPTHS AND SEEKING AFTER ESSENCES, MAN MUST CONTENT HIMSELF WITH THE SURFACE PHENOMENA; THAT IS,WITH WHAT HIS SENSES TELL HIM ABOUT THE WORLD IN THIS NEW GOAL OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, EMPIRICISM BECOMES CENTRAL II. OCCULT QUALITIES IN THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY THE ALTERNATIVE AIM OF GASSENDI'S NATURAL PHILOSOPHY RAISES A NUMBER OF INTERESTING POINTS ABOUT THE EPISTEMOLOGICAL IMPACTOF THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY ON EARLY MODERN SCIENCE THESE POINTS CONCERN THE TRANSITION FROM THE ARISTOTELIAN TO THE MECHANICAL MODE OF EXPLANATION A. ARISTOTELIAN VS. MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY IN THE ARISTOTELIAN SCHEME OF THINGS, THE IDEAS OF FORMS AND QUALITIES WERE OF CENTRAL IMPORTANCE IN EXPLAINING THE NATURALWORLD ARISTOTLE CONCEIVED OF MATTER AS AN UNDIFFERENTIATED, UNIVERSAL, PRIMARY STUFF OR SUBSTANCE HOWEVER, WE NEVER SEE THIS PRIMARY SUBSTANCE IN THIS UNDIFFERENTIATED STATE; WE ONLY SENSE OR EXPERIENCE SUBSTANCE ACCOMPANIED BY FORM AS THEIR NAMES IMPLY, THE ARISTOTELIAN IDEAS OF 'SUBSTANTIAL FORMS' AND 'REAL QUALITIES' WERE REAL ENTITIES ATTACHED TO MATTER THESE FORMS AND QUALITIES ARE WHAT GIVE UNDIFFERENTIATED MATTER ITS DISTINCTIVENESS ACCORDING TO ARISTOTELIAN EPISTEMOLOGY, SINCE THESE FORMS AND QUALITIES CAN BE IMMEDIATELY PERCEIVED BY OUR SENSES, THEYCONSTITUTE WHAT CAN BE KNOWN ABOUT THE NATURAL WORLD THINK FOR A MOMENT OF THE FOUR ARISTOTELIAN ELEMENTS -EARTH,WATER, AIR, AND FIRE -- ALL ARE COMPOSED OF THE SAME SORT OF SUBSTANCE BUT EACH IS DIFFERENTIATED FROM ALL THE OTHERS BY REASON OF THE DIFFERING COMBINATIONS OF QUALITIES THUS EARTH IS SUBSTANCE ATTENDED BY THE QUALITIES OF DRYNESS AND COLDNESS; WATER BY THE QUALITIES OF COLDNESS AND MOISTNESS; AIR BY MOISTNESS AND HOTNESS; AND FIRE BY HOTNESS AND DRYNESS [DIAGRAM] THIS DIAGRAM NOT ONLY SHOWS THE SYMMETRIES OF ARISTOTELIAN MATTER THEORY, IT ALSO MAKES CLEAR HOW TRANSMUTATION CAN TAKE PLACE THE SUBSTITUTION, SAY, OF THE QUALITY OF DRYNESS FOR THE MOISTNESS OF WATER RESULTS IN THE TRANSMUTATION OF WATER TO EARTH; JUST AS THE SUBSTITUTION OF HOTNESS FOR COLDNESS RESULTS IN THE TRANSMUTATION OF WATER TO AIR OR VAPOR BUT OF COURSE THERE WERE MANY MORE SUBSTANTIAL FORMS AND REAL QUALITIES THAN THESE FOUR; FORMS AND QUALITIES WERE POSTULATED FOR COLOR, SOLIDITY, TASTE, VOLATILITY, CORROSIVENESS,AND SO ON IN FACT, ALMOST ALL DISCRETE ELEMENTS OF PERCEPTION WERE ASSOCIATED WITH A CERTAIN FORM OR QUALITY -- OR PUTTING THIS THE OTHER WAY AROUND, FORMS AND QUALITIES ARE JUST THOSE PROPERTIES OF MATTER THAT CAN EXCITE SENSATION AND SINCE THESE WERE THOUGHT TO BE REAL, INNATE COMPONENTS OF PHYSICAL BODIES, THEY WERE EMPLOYED AS THE FINAL EXPLANATION OF THE PROPERTIES OF MATTER BECAUSE QUALITITES, IN THE ARISTOTELIAN SENSE, ARE THE CAUSES OFATTRIBUTES OF MATTER, AND BECAUSE THEY ARE IMMEDIATELY ACCESSIBLE TO THE SENSES, THERE IS NO NEED TO LOOK ANY FURTHER FOR EXPLANATIONS IF I PUT MY FINGER IN A GLASS OF WATER, I SENSE IMMEDIATELY AND DIRECTLY THE ESSENTIAL NATURE OF THE WATER; NAMELY, ITS COLDNESS AND MOISTNESS; IF I PLACE MY HAND NEAR A FLAME, I AGAINSENSE DIRECTLY ITS REAL QUALITIES -- HOTNESS AND DRYNESS THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO EXPLAIN ABOUT MY SENSE PERCEPTIONS OR THE PROPERTIES OF THE BODIES UNDER QUESTION SINCE I AM IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH ESSENCES OF THOSE BODIES HOWEVER, THE PROPERTIES OF NATURE ARE NOT ALWAYS AS ACCESSIBLE OR TRANSPARENT TO OUR SENSES AS A GLASS OF WATER IN FACT, QUALITIES WERE DIVIDED INTO TWO BROAD CATEGORIES; MANIFEST AND OCCULT 'MANIFEST' QUALITIES ARE SIMPLY THOSE THAT ARE SENSIBLE, OR DIRECTLY PERCEIVED BY OUR SENSES 'OCCULT' QUALITIES ARE INSENSIBLE, OR NOT REVEALED BY OUR SENSES ALTHOUGH THESE WERE VALID ARISTOTELIAN CATEGORIES, CHRISTIAN ARSITOTELIANISM, AS IT DEVELOPED IN THE LATIN WEST AFTER THE 13TH CENTURY, TENDED TO DENY THE EXISTENCE OF OCCULT QUALITIES SINCE OCCULT QUALITIES WERE INSENSIBLE AND FELL OUTSIDE THE RANGE OF HUMAN SENSES, THEY WERE UNKNOWABLE, AND THUS COULDNOT BE PART OF THE WORLD OF INTELLIGIBLE DISCOURSE HERE WE MIGHT RECALL THE OLD ARISTOTELIAN MAXIM THAT THERE ISNOTHING IN THE MIND THAT WAS NOT FIRST IN THE SENSES NOW THE CONVERSE OF THIS SUGGESTS THAT WHAT WE CANNOT SENSECANNOT BE PART OF OUR MIND; WE CANNOT KNOW IT IF ONLY THE SENSIBLE IS INTELLIGIBLE, THEN THE INSENSIBLE MUST BEUNINTELLIGIBLE THUS OCCULT QUALITIES WERE UNCOMFORTABLE ENTITIES FOR SCHOLASTIC ARISTOTELIANS; THOUGH THEY MIGHT EXIST, THEY COULD NOT BECOME PART OF THE UNIVERSE KNOWABLE TO THE HUMAN MIND INDEED, THE WORD 'OCCULT' STILL CARRIES WITH IT SOME OF THESE NEGATIVE CONNOTATIONS IN ITS SIMPLEST SENSE, 'OCCULT' MEANS HIDDEN, CONCEALED, NOT EXPOSED TO VIEW; BUT IT ALSO HAS THE SENSE OF NOT APPREHENDED BYTHE MIND, BEYOND THE RANGE OF UNDERSTANDING OR ORDINARY KNOWLEDGE YET THE SENSE OF 'OCCULT' THAT MOST READILY COMES TO MIND FOR MOST OF US IS THAT OF SOMETHING HIDDEN OR SECRET, SOMETHING COMMUNICATED ONLY TO THE INITIATED AND, MORE PARTICULARLY, WE THINK OF 'OCCULT' IN CONNECTION WITH THOSE SCIENCES, LIKE MAGIC, ALCHEMY, ASTROLOGY, WHICH INVOLVE THE KNOWLEDGE OR USE OF AGENCIES OF A SECRET OR MYSTERIOUS NATURE PUT SIMPLY SCHOLASTIC ARISTOTELIAN SCIENCE WAS THE SCIENCE OF 'MANIFEST' QUALITIES WHILE THE 'OCCULT' SCIENCES INVOLVED THE USEOF OCCULT, OR INSENSIBLE PROPERTIES AND BECAUSE THEY WERE INSENSIBLE, THEY WERE ALSO UNINTELLIGIBLE AND, BY EXTENSION, ILLEGITIMATE SINCE THEY CAN ONLY BE KNOWN IMPERFECTLY OR THROUGH SUPERNATURAL AGENCIES THUS MUCH OF THE MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE UNDERSTANDING OFMAGIC DEPENDED ON THE ARISTOTELIAN DISTINCTION BETWEEN MANIFEST AND OCCULT PROPERTIES THE MAGICIAN DID NOT REALLY UNDERSTAND -- THAT IS, HE DID NOT REALLY HAVE SENSE EXPERIENCE OF -- OCCULT QUALITIES, NOR WAS IT HE WHO PERFORMED WONDERS; RATHER HE WAS ABLE TO MANIPULATE FORCES HE DID NOT UNDERSTAND THROUGH THE AGENCY OF SOME SUPERNATURAL AND TYPICALLY DIABOLICAL SPIRIT AND THIS, OF COURSE, WAS NOT TRUE KNOWLEDGE, BUT ILLEGITIMATE KNOWLEDGE, AND HENCE DAMNABLE NOW THINK HOW ALL THIS CHANGES WITH THE ADVENT OF THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHIES OF DESCARTES AND GASSENDI ONE OF THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY WAS THAT ITS EXPLANATIONS WERE, IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, PICTUREABLE -- ONE CAN VISUALIZE THE EXPLANATORY MECHANISM IN TERMS OF THE MOTIONS, SHAPES, OR COLLISIONS OF LITTLE CORPUSCLES OF MATTER IN THE ARISTOTELIAN EXPLANATION, ONE NEVER HAS A CLEAR VISUAL IMAGE OF QUALITIES OR FORMS -- INDEED, MOST OF THE ARISTOTELIAN QUALITIES ARE RELATED MORE TO THE SENSE OF TOUCH THAN TO SIGHT THE FOUR QUALITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOUR ELEMENTS ARE ALL THINGS YOU CAN SENSE THROUGH YOUR FINGERS -- IN FACT YOUR FINGERIS IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH REAL QUALITIES AND SUBSTANTIAL FORMS THE MECHANICAL EXPLANATIONS DESCARTES AND GASSENDI GIVE FOR THE PROPERTIES OF MATTER, ON THE OTHER HAND, ARE THINGS THAT CANBE PICTURED IN THE MIND'S EYE BUT NOT DIRECTLY TOUCHED OR SENSED THAT IS PRECISELY THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY QUALITIES SECONDARY QUALITIES, THE THINGS WE EXPERIENCE DIRECTLY THROUGH OUR SENSES, ARE EPIPHENOMENA THAT ARISE IN THE ACT OF PERCEPTION AND HAVE NO INDEPENDENT EXISTENCE IN MATTER AND WHAT DOES HAVE OBJECTIVE EXISTENCE, NAMELY THE PRIMARY QUALITIES, ARE NOT IMMEDIATELY ACCESSIBLE TO OUR SENSE OF TOUCHOR EVEN TO OUR SENSE OF SIGHT -- THOUGH VISUALIZABLE, PRIMARY QUALITIES ARE NOT VISIBLE, OWING TO THE MICROSCOPIC NATURE OF THE POSTULATED MECHANISMS YET -- FOR THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHER -- SIZE, SHAPE, CONFIGURATION, AND MOTION ARE WHAT ARE REALLY EXIST AND ARE WHAT REALLY CAN BE KNOWN THUS WE HAVE A CURIOUS INVERSION OF THE ONTOLOGY OF THE KNOWLABLE; FOR WHAT DESCARTES AND GASSENDI POSTULATE AS KNOWABLE ARE INSENSIBLE AND THUS, IN PROPER ARISTOTELIAN TERMINOLOGY, OCCULT AND WHAT THE ARISTOTELIANS HAD POSTULATED AS KNOWABLE, NAMELY THE MANIFEST, SENSIBLE QUALITIES, THEY DISMISS AS ILLUSIONS IRONICALLY, BY DENYING THAT ANY QUALITY OR PROPERTY OF NATURECOULD EVER BE DIRECTLY PERCEIVED, MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHERS EXPANDED THE RANGE OF NATURAL PHENOMENA THAT COULD BE LEGITIMATELY INVESTIGATED BY ALLOWING INSENSIBLE QUALITIES INTONATURAL PHILOSOPHY FOR MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHERS, INSENSIBLE NO LONGER MEANT UNINTELLIGIBLE SINCE THE INSENSIBILITY OF PRIMARY QUALITIES DID NOT PREVENT THEM FROM KNOWING, OR AT LEAST INVESTIGATING AND EXPLAINING, HOW THE WORLD WORKS AND THUS, WHEN MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHERS CONDEMNED THE OCCULT QUALITIES OF THE ARISTOTELIANS, WHAT THEY CONDEMNED WAS NOT THE IDEA OF QUALITIES BEING HIDDEN FROM THE HUMAN SENSES -- FOR PRIMARY QUALITIES WERE NECESSARILY OCCULT -BUT THE ARISTOTELIANS' RELUCTANCE TO TREAT OCCULT QUALITIES AS LEGITMATE IN OTHER WORDS, BY INVERTING TRADITIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY, MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHERS OPENED THE DOORS TO THE INVESTIGATION OF A RANGE OF PHENOMENA THAT BEFORE HAD BEEN DEEMED ILLEGITIMATE AND THEY CHASTIZED SCHOLASTIC ARISTOTELIANS FOR RESTING CONTENT WITH THE MERE LABELLING OF INSENSIBLE QUALITIES AS UNINTELLIGIBLE AND NEGLECTING TO PURSUE THEIR INVESTIGATION ANY FURTHER PERHAPS NOTHING CHARACTERIZES THIS SHIFT IN EPISTEMOLOGY MORECLEARLY THAN A 17TH-CENTURY MEANING OF THE TERM 'OCCULT' THATHAS SINCE FALLEN OUT OF USAGE THE OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY TELLS US THAT, IN THE 17TH AND EARLY 18TH CENTURIES, THE WORD OCCULT HAD THE FOLLOWING MEANING: "APPLIED IN EARLY SCIENCE OR NATURAL PHILOSOPHY TO PHYSICAL QUALITIES NOT MANIFEST TO DIRECT OBSERVATION BUT DISCOVERABLE ONLY BY EXPERIMENT; [QUALITIES] . . . WHOSE NATURE WAS UNKNOWN OR UNEXPLAINED; [THE] TREATING OF SUCH QUALITIES EXPERIMENTAL[LY]" THUS, IN THE MINDS OF MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHERS, ARISTOTELIANS DESEREVED THEIR SCORN NOT BECAUSE THEY BELIEVED IN OCCULT QUALITIES, BUT BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT TAKE THEM SERIOUSLY ENOUGH TO EXPERIMENT ON THEM B. HERMETIC VS. MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY IF OCCULT QUALITIES WERE NOW A LEGITIMATE PART OF THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHER'S WORLD OF THE INTELLIGIBLE, THEN HOW DID THIS AFFECT THE STATUS OF THE 'OCCULT SCIENCES,' OF SECRET KNOWLEDGE, AND THE MANIPULATION OF SUPERNATURAL AGENCIES? WEREN'T THE CHIEF FOUNDERS OF THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHER, DESCARTES AND GASSENDI, CONSCIOUSLY AND VIGOROUSLY OPPOSED TO THE ANIMISTIC WORLD OF THE HERMETIC PHILOSOPHERS? DIDN'T THEY DELIBERATELY SEEK AN ONTOLOGY OF PRIMARY QUALITIES THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO DISPOSE OF THE PSYCHIC REDUCTIONISM OF THE MAGUS? AND DIDN'T THEY ATTEMPT TO SHOW THAT ALL OF NATURE'S OPERATIONS WERE OPEN TO THE HUMAN MIND, THAT THERE ARE NO SECRETS OF NATURE THAT CANNOT BE ACCOUNTED FOR IN TERMS OF THECLEAR AND DISTINCT GEOMETRIC PROPERTIES OF MATTER AND MOTION? ALTHOUGH WE CAN JUSTLY ANSWER EACH OF THESE QUESTIONS IN THEAFFIRMATIVE, I DON'T THINK WE CAN SIMPLY SAY -- AS MANY HISTORIANS OF SCIENCE HAVE -- THAT THE RISE OF THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY WAS THE CAUSE, OR LED DIRECTLY TO, THE DECLINE OF MAGIC THE HISTORICAL PROBLEMS OF THE INTERACTION BETWEEN SCIENCE AND MAGIC DO NOT ALLOW FOR SUCH AN EASY EQUATION AS THIS, WHERE THE MAJOR TERMS STAND IN A SIMPLE INVERSE RELATIONSHIP TOONE ANOTHER THOUGHOUT MOST OF THE HIGH MIDDLE AGES, SCHOLASTIC ARISTOTELIANS HAD RELEGATED OCCULT QUALITIES TO THE ILLEGITIMATE OR QUASI-LEGITIMATE DOMAIN OF ASTROLOGY, ALCHEMY,AND MAGIC HOWEVER, IN THE 16TH CENTURY, THE AUTHORITY ENJOYED BY THE HERMETIC CORPUS AND ACCEPTANCE OF RENAISSANCE ANIMISTIC NATURAL PHILOSOPHIES GAVE THE SCIENCES OF THE OCCULT GREATER CURRENCY AND LEGITIMACY THAN THEY HAD EVER OBTAINED IN THE SCHOOLS AND, THE RENAISSANCE MAGI HAD ALSO LINKED THE MAGICAL WORLDVIEW TO AN ACTIVE EXPERIMENTAL ATTITUDE TOWARD NATURE FOR IF YOU CANNOT SENSE OR UNDERSTAND THE HIDDEN POWERS OF NATURE, YOU MIGHT AT LEAST ARRIVE AT THE PROPER TECHNIQUE OR METHOD NECESSARY TO CONTROL THOSE POWERS THROUGH TRIAL AND ERROR, THROUGH EMPIRICAL EFFORTS, AND EXPERIMENTATION THEN, IN THE 17TH CENTURY, THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY COMES ALONG WITH A NEW ONTOLOGY AND A NEW EPISTEMOLOGY: OCCULT QUALITIES, THOUGH STILL INSENSIBLE, ARE NOW PART OF THE INTELLIGIBLE WORLD AND THUS A LEGITIMATE PART OF ORTHODOX NATURAL PHILOSOPHY THIS NEW IMAGE OF LEGITIMATE KNOWLEDGE ALLOWED FOR THE WHOLESALE APPROPRIATION OF LARGE CHUNKS OF THE OCCULT WORLDOF THE RENAISSANCE MAGUS AND THE SUBSUMPTION OF MAGICAL TECHNIQUES AND IDEAS INTO THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY PERHAPS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT EXAMPLE OF SUBSUMPTION WAS THE BRINGING OF THE EMPIRICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL ATTITUDES OF THE MAGUS UNDER THE GOALS AND PRINCIPLES OF THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY THE EXPERIMENTALISM OF THE MAGUS WAS TO ENABLE HIM TO MANIPULATE HIDDEN POWERS HE DID NOT FULLY UNDERSTAND; WHEREAS THE EXPERIMENTS OF THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHER WAS DESIGNED TO HELP HIM DECIDE AMONG VARIOUS POSSIBLE MECHANICAL MODELS -- MODELS WHOSE MECHANICAL PRINCIPLES HE BELIEVED HE UNDERSTOOD THOROUGHLY THUS, IN THEIR ACTS OF APPROPRIATION AND SUBSUMPTION, GASSENDI AND DESCARTES SUBSTITUTED MECHANICAL REDUCTIONISM FOR THE PSYCHIC REDUCTIONISM OF THE MAGUS AS THEIR PREFERRED MODE OF EXPLANATION IN THE HERMETIC UNDERSTANDING OF THINGS, THE ANCIENT MAGUS WHO BROUGHT A STATUE TO LIVE WAS ABLE TO DO SO BECAUSE HE COULD MANIPULATE THE VITAL FORCES OF THE STARS AND CHANNEL THEM INTO AN INANIMATE OBJECT DESCARTES APPROPRIATES THIS VERY IMAGE AND INVERTS IT; THE ANIMATE BEING -- EITHER THE HUMAN BODY DEPRIVED OF SOUL OR, MORE PERFECTLY, A SOULESS ANIMAL -- IS DENIED ANY SPECIAL ANIMATING PRINCIPLE AND IS REDUCED TO AN INANIMATE OBJECT, A MACHINE CONSISTING OF STRINGS, PULLEYS, HYDRAULIC TUBES, AND INFLATIBLE MUSCLES HE TAKES THE OCCULT POWERS OF THE MAGNET AND REDUCES THEM TO A STREAM OF INSENSIBLY SMALL -- BUT EMINENTLY PICTUREABLE -- CORKSCREW-SHAPED PARTICLES HURLING THROUGH THE AIR AND BORING INTO THE PROPERLY THREADED PORES OF IRON THERE WERE EVEN FOLLOWERS OF DESCARTES WHO CONTRIVED A MECHANCIAL EXPLANATION FOR THE ASTROLOGICAL AFFECTS OF THE STARS ON HUMAN PERSONALITIES EVERY STAR IN THE SKY RADIATES PARTICLES OF A DISTINCT SHAPE, ANDAS THE UNIQUE MIXTURE OF STELLAR PARTICLES IMPINGES ON THE HEART AND BODY OF THE NEWBORN BABY AT THE MOMENT OF ITS BIRTH,THEY LEAVE AN IMPRINT OF THEIR SHAPES AND THUS SET THE PATTERN FOR ITS SUBSEQUENT DELEVOPMENT FOR EVERY PHENOMENON THERE IS A MECHANICAL EXPLANATION AND, BECAUSE THE ONTOLOGY OF THE NEW MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHYGRANTED LEGITIMACY TO OCCULT QUALITIES, MANY OF THE PHENOMENA OF TYPICALLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE OCCULT SCIENCES WERE ALSO ACCEPTED AS LEGITIMATE AND SUBJECTED TO MECHANICAL EXPLANATION THIS IS NOT TO SAY, HOWEVER, THAT MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHERS WEREREALLY MAGICIANS IN DISGUISE, OR THAT THEY WERE SIMPLY USING A NEW BAG OF MECHANICAL TRICKS TO EXPLAIN THE MAGICAL WORLD THEY STILL BELIEVED IN BY APPROPRIATING CERTAIN ELEMENTS FROM THE WORLD OF THE MAGUS, THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHER BROUGHT THOSE ELEMENTS UNDER A NEW PRINCIPLE AND RULE AND BY PLACING THEM IN A RADICALLY DIFFERENT EPISTEMOLOGICAL CATEGORY, HE GAVE THOSE ELEMENTS A NEW MEANING AND A NEW CONTEXT AND THIS MODEL OF APPROPRIATION IS APPLICABLE NOT ONLY TO THE HERMETIC PHILOSOPHER BUT ALSO TO THE SCHOLASTIC ARISTOTELIAN FOR DESPITE THE OVERT CRITICISM AND DELIBERATE RENUNCIATION OFARISTOTELIAN PHILOSOPHY BY BOTH DESCARTES AND GASSENDI -ANDWE COULD WELL THROUGH IN GALILEO AND BACON -- THEY STILL TOOKMUCH FROM THE SCHOLASTICS IT WAS TRUE FOR BOTH THE ARISTOTELIAN AND THE HERMETIC PHILOSOPHER, THAT WHAT ONE KNOWS BEST IS WHAT IS MOST FAMILIAR; THE DIRECT SENSE IMPRESSION OF THE ARISTOTELIAN'S FINGERS AND THEPSYCHIC PROCESSES OF THE HERMETIC PHILSOPHER'S OWN MIND THE ARISTOTELIAN KNOWS AND UNDERSTANDS THE WORLD BECAUSE HE TRUSTS HIS SENSES TO GIVE HIM DIRECT ACCESS TO THE REAL QUALITIES AND SUBSTANTIAL FORMS OF MATTER; WHEREAS THE HERMETIC MAGUS GAINS A SYMPATHETIC UNDERSTANDING -- IF NOT A STRICTLY RATIONAL KNOWLEDGE -- OF THE WORLD BECAUSE HE TRUSTS THAT THE PSYCHIC PROCESSES OF HIS OWN MIND PROVIDE HIM WITH A SET OF RELIABLE ANALOGIES FOR THE OPERATIONS OF NATURE FOR DESCARTES, WHAT ONE KNOWS BEST IS WHAT IS MOST CERTAIN; NAMELY, THE CLEAR AND DISTINCT IDEAS OF GEOMETRY AND WHEN HE THOUGHT THAT HE HAD SUCCEEDED IN TRANSFERRING THE IDEAS OF GEOMETRY TO HIS ONTOLOGY OF MATTER, HE FELT HE HADTHE FOUNDATIONS FOR A NEW NATURAL PHILOSOPHY -- A PHILOSOPHY BASED NOT ON THE FAMILIARITY OF SENSE PERCEPTIONS AND MENTAL PROCESSES, BUT ON THE CERTAINTY OF GEOMETRIC DEMONSTRATION III. FROM RENAISSANCE TO REBELLION A. A NEW IMAGE OF KNOWLEDGE LET ME STOP AND STAND BACK FROM THIS EXTENDED ANALYSIS OF THEMECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY AND TRY TO GIVE A BIT OF A SUMMARY OF WHAT WE HAVE THUS FAR COVERED THIS, I THINK, WILL HELP PLACE THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE 'NEW SCIENCE' OF THE 17TH CENTURY SO FAR WE HAVE ONLY LOOKED AT DEVELOPMENTS IN TWO OR THREE SCIENTIFIC TRADITIONS; ASTRONOMY, NATURAL PHILOSOPHY BROADLY DEFINED, AND THE SCIENCE OF MOTION (OR MECHANICS) IF WE TRY TO COMPARE THE CHARACTER OF THE TRANSFORMATION IN ASTRONOMY WITH THOSE IN NATURAL PHILOSOPHY OR MECHANICS, WE FIND SOME SIMILARITIES AND SOME DIFFERENCE YET IN NO CASE DO WE FIND -- AT LEAST I DO NOT SEE -- THE CLEAR PATTERN OF CHANGE THAT KUHN CHARACTERIZED AS A SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION AS WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN, THE TRANSFORMATIONS IN ASTRONOMY - FROM PTOLEMAIC TO COPERNICAN, FROM COPERNICAN TO TYCHONIC, AND FROM COPERNICAN TO KEPLERIAN -- ARE HARD TO CAST IN THE KUHNIAN MODEL ALTHOUGH ONE MAY IDENTIFY SOMETHING LIKE A CRISIS STATE IN 16THCENTURY ASTRONOMY, IT WAS A CRISIS OF AESTHETICS THAT CAME INTOEXISTENCE WITH THE BIRTH OF THE PTOLEMAIC THEORY ITSELF AND WAS NOT GENERATED ON THE EVE OF COPERNICUS' BIRTH THROUGH THEGRADUAL ACCUMULATION OF ANOMALY TYCHO'S TRANSFORMATION OF THE COPERNICAN PLANETARY PARADIGMDOES NOT SEEM TO FIT THE REVOLUTIONARY PATTERN IN ANY RESPECT, SINCE IT SEEMS IN ESSENCE TO HAVE BEEN A SOLUTION PREMISED ON COMPROMISE AND NOT ON RADICAL INNOVATION KEPLER, OF COURSE, DISREGARDED THE TYCHONIC SYSTEM FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, AND SOUGHT INSTEAD TO IMPROVE THE COPERNICAN SYSTEM THUS IT MIGHT SEEM THAT HE SAW HIMSELF AS ENGAGING IN NORMAL COPERNICAN SCIECNE; THAT IS, WORKING OUT THE DETAILS OF THE PARADIGM COPERNICUS HAD ALREADY ESTABLISHED YET IT WOULD BE HARD TO DENY THAT KEPLER WROUGHT MORE CHANGES IN THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF PLANETARY ASTRONOMY THAN COPERNICUS HIMSLEF HE ABANDONNED EPICYCLES, ECCENTRICS, AND EQUANTS AND EVEN REJECTED THE ANCIENT PRINCIPLE OF UNIFORM CIRCULAR MOTION HE INTRODUCED A WORKABLE -- IF IMAGINATIVE -- CELESTIAL PHYSICS AND DISPLAYED A GREATER FIDELITY TO OBSERVATIONAL DATA THAN ANY ASTRONOMER WHO EVER WORKED BEFORE HIM AND HE SET HIS BEAUTIFULLY SIMPLE PLANETARY LAWS IN A METAPHYSICAL FRAMEWORK WHICH CONTEMPORARIES REJECTED ALMOST AS SOON AS THEY READ IT THOUGH ONE CANNOT DENY THE IMPACT AND INFLUENCE OF THE KEPLERIAN REVOLUTION IN ASTRONOMY, IT IS DIFFICULT TO SEE HOW WECAN SPEAK MEANIGFULLY OF THE IMPACT OF THE KEPLERIAN PARADIGM -- SINCE HIS PARADIGM OF GEOMETRIC HARMONIES WAS ADOPTED BY NO ONE AND WHAT GAVE HELIOCENTRISM GREATER CURRENCY IN THE FIRST THIRD OF THE 17TH CENTURY WAS NOT THE THEORETICAL TRIUMPHS OF KEPLER BUT THE SENSATIONAL -- BUT ESSENTIALLY AMBIVALENT -TELESCOPIC OBSERVATIONS OF GALILEO YET AT THE SAME TIME, GALILEO'S NEW MECHANICS WAS DEVELOPED IN CONSCIOUS OPPOSITION TO ARISTOTELIAN MECHANICS AND DESIGNED EXPLICITLY FOR THE MOVING EARTH OF THE UNADULTERATED COPERNICAN SYSTEM ALTHOUGH TYCHO KNEW COPERNICUS' STUDENTS; AND ALTHOUGH KEPLER PERSONALLY KNEW AND WORKED FOR TYCHO; AND ALTHOUGH GALILEO AND KEPLER WERE FELLOW-COPERNICANS AND CORRESPONDED, IT WOULD SEEM THAT NONE OF THEM EVER GOT IT TOGETHER INTELLECTUALLY TYCHO REJECTS COPERNICUS OUTRIGHT; KEPLER REJECTS TYCHO AND DRASTICALLY ALTERS ALMOST ALL THE BASIC ASSUMPTIONS OF THE COPERNICAN SYSTEM EXCEPT ITS HELIOCENTRICITY; GALILEO REJECTS BOTH TYCHO AND KEPLER AND RETURNS TO A SIMPLER -- AND NOW OUT-DATED -- VERSION OF COPERNICANISM: AND THEN WE ARE ASKED TO ACCEPT THE NOTION THAT THEY ARE ALL WORKING UNDER THE SAME COPERNICAN PARADIGM AND WE MIGHT ADD THAT CONSENSUS ON THE MATTER OF THE COPERNICAN-KEPLERIAN-GALILEAN PLANETARY THEORY WAS SLOW TO BUILD, AND THAT IT WAS THE TYCHONIC SYSTEM THAT WON THE ALLEGIANCE OF MOST 17TH-CENTURY ASTRONOMERS IN OTHER WORDS, THERE WAS CONFUSION REGARDING THE 'TRUE FORM'OF THE COPERNICAN PARADIGN -- WHAT WITH KEPLER'S ELLIPTICAL ORBITS ANF GALILEO'S CIRCULAR INTERTIA -- AND THE SIMULTANEOUS EXISTENCE OF AT LEAST TWO MUTUALLY INCOMPATIBLE, AND PRESUMABLY MUTUALLY INCOMMENSURABLE, THEORIES OF PLANETARYMOTION AND PLEASE KEEP IN MIND, THIS SITUATION ENDURED FOR VERY NEARLY A CENTURY: FROM THE TIME OF TYCHO'S PUBLICATION OF HIS THEORY IN 1588 UNTIL ROUGHLY THE TIME OF NEWTON'S PRINCIPIA PUBLISHED IN 1687 AND DON'T FORGET THAT THIS WAS IN ONE OF THE MORE MATURE AND WELL-DEVELOPED DISCIPLINES OF EARLY MODERN SCIENCE WHAT ABOUT NATURAL PHILOSOPHY? HOW DO THE TRANSFORMATIONS HERE FIT THOSE OUTLINED BY KUHN? A FAIR-MINDED DEFENDER OF KUHN MIGHT PROTEST THAT NATURAL PHILOSOPHY, AS REPRESENTED BY SCHOLASTIC ARISTOTELIANISM, HERMETIC ANIMISM, AND THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY REALLY DON'THAVE THE SORT OF TIGHT THEORETICAL STRUCTURE REQUIRED BY KUHN'S MODEL AND THUS OUGHT NOT TO BE SUBJECTED TO KUHNIAN ANALYSIS I WOULD BE INCLINED TO CONCEDE THIS POINT; THE HERMETIC CORPUSAND THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY OF DESCARTES AND THE ATOMISMOF GASSENDI AREN'T PARADIGMS IN THE KUHNIAN SENSE AND THE TRANSFORMATION FROM ONE TO ANOTHER CANNOT BE PROPERLY CHARACTERIZED AS PARADIGM SHIFTS YET AS SOON AS WE CONCEDE THIS, WE ALSO CONCEDE THAT KUHN HASLITTLE TO SAY ABOUT ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT CONCEPTUAL SHIFTS OF THE 17TH CENTURY THE PROBLEM IS, OF COURSE, THAT THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY IS NOT A THEORY IN ANY REGULAR SENSE IT IS A SET OF LOOSELY DEFINED CRITERIA FOR THE EVALUATION OF ACCEPTABLE EXPLANATIONS OF NATURAL PHENOMENA OR, TO CAST THIS IN TERMS OF THE THREE CATEGORIES OF SCIENCE I REPRESENTED A WHILE BACK, THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY IS NOT PART OF THE BODY OF KNOWLEDGE, BUT A PART OF THE IMAGE OF KNOWLEDGE NOW AT FIRST HEARING THIS MAY STRIKE YOU AS A STRANGE THING TO ARGUE SINCE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHERS SEEM TO DO NOTHING BUT MAKE EXPLICIT CLAIMS ABOUT THE STRUCTURE AND OPERATION OF THE NATURAL WORLD AND THIS OF COURSE IS PRECISELY THE DEFINITION I GAVE FOR THE BODY OF KNOWLEDGE BUT KEEP IN MIND THAT THE PARTICULAR MECHANICAL EXPLANATIONSPROVIDED BY DESCARTES OR BY GASSENDI ARE IN THEMSELVES ALMOST MEANINGLESS THAT IS, ONE CAN ACCEPT OR REJECT PARTICULAR MECHANICAL MODELS AND STILL BE A MECHANCIAL PHILOSOPHER DESCARTES HIMSLEF SAID THAT ONE MUST RESORT TO EXPERIMENT TO DECIDE AMONG A NUMBER OF POSSIBLE MECHANICAL EXPLANATIONS THIS IN TURN SUGGESTS THAT THE REAL HEART OF THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY DOES NOT LIE IN THE PARTICULAR MODEL THAT IS BEING PUT FOREWARD TO EXPLAIN A PARTICULAR PHENOMENON RATHER, IT IS THE UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES OF EXPLANATION WHAT THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY REALLY DOES IS TO PROVIDE AN ONTOLOGY OF MATTER AND MOTION AND TO IMPOSE CLEAR EPISTEMOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS IN OTHER WORDS, ALTHOUGH THE MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY MAKES CLAIMS ABOUT THE OPERATIONS OF NATURE, ITS REAL THRUST IS IN ESTABLISHING NEW CRITERIA FOR ACCEPTABLE KNOWLEDGE AND SETTING THE STANDARDS FOR NEW MODES OF EXPLANATION THUS THE MOST IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTION OF THE NEW MECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY WAS A SET OF CRITERIA FOR JUDGING WHAT CONSTITUTED ALEGITIMATE EXPLANATION: IF THE EXPLANATION OF A PHENOMENON COULD BE CAST IN TERMS OF THE SHAPE, SIZE, CONFIGURATION, OR MOTION OF INERT, DEAD, AND PASSIVE MATTER, THEN IS WAS DEEMED A LEGITIMATE EXPLANATION ON THE OTHER HAND, EXPLANATIONS THAT WERE NOT MECHANICAL -LIKE ARISTOTELIAN FORMS AND HERMETIC OCCULT POWERS -- WERE CONSIDERED SUSPECT THE NEW EPISTEMOLOGY RESTED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT A PICTUREABLE EXPLANATION WAS MORE CERTAIN THAN EITHER THE 'SENSIBLE' EXPLANATION OF THE ARISTOTELIANS OR THE 'PSYCHIC' ANALOGIES OF THE MAGI B. IN PRAISE OF NOVELTY AGAINST THE BACKDROP OF HERMETICISM AND ARISTOTELIANISM, THEMECHANICAL PHILOSOPHY REPRESENTS A NEW SORT OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY; JUST AS COPERNICUS REPRESENTS A NEW SORT OF ASTRONOMY IN FACT THE IDEA OF NEWNESS OR NOVELTY IS ONE OF THE MOST STRIKING FEATURES OF EARLY MODERN SCIENCE AND THIS OPENNESS TO THE NEW IS NOWHERE MORE EVIDENT THAN IN THE TITLES OF SCIENTIFIC BOOKS THERE IS THE 'NEW ASTRONOMY' OF KEPLER AND THE 'TWO NEW SCIENCES' OF GALILEO BOTH DESCARTES AND BACON CLAIMED TO HAVE COME UP WITH A NEWMETHOD FOR DOING NATURAL PHILOSOPHY; AND BACON EVEN ENTITLED HIS NEW SYSTEM THE 'NEW ORGANUM' -- 'ORGANUM' BEING THE TITLE GIVEN TO ARISTOTLE'S TREATISES ON LOGIC AND OF COURSE THERE WERE SEVERAL TREATISES BY MANY AUTHORS ON THE 'NEW STAR' OF 1572 AND AGAIN ON THE 'NEW STAR' OF 1604 IN 1651 A JESUIT NAMED RICCIOLI PUBLISHED A WORK CALLED THE 'NEWALMEGEST' AND SEVERAL OF RICCIOLI'S FELLOW-JESUITS HAD PUBLISHED WORKS ON THE 'NEW HEAVENS' A 'NEW METHOD' FOR INVESTIGATING MAGNETISM, ON 'NEW STARS AND COMETS', ON THE 'NEW ASTRONOMY' --INCLUDING A 'NEW DEMONSTRATION' OF THE IMMOBILITY OF THE EARTH THERE WERE EVEN TITLES PROCLAIMING A "NEW ASTROLOGY" THROUGHOUT THE 17TH CENTURY THERE APPEARED BOOKS ON A "NEW THEORY OF LIGHT," ON A "NEW THEORY OF VISION," AND ON A "NEW THEORY OF COMETS," THERE WERE TITLES PROCLAIMING A "NEW MEDICINE," A "NEW SURGURY," AN A "NEW ANATOMY" IN MATHEMATICS THERE WERE WORKS ON A "NEW ALGEBRA" AND A "NEW TREATMENT OF CONIC SECTION" THERE WAS ALSO A "NEW NATURAL HISTORY OF MEXICAN PLANTS," "NEW EXPERIMENTS CONCERNING THE NATURE OF VIPERS," A "NEW METHOD FOR CLASSIFYING PLANTS," A "NEW THEORY OF THE EARTH" AND IN TECHNOLOGY THERE WERE BOOKS ON "NEW MACHINES," "NEW INSTRUMENTS," AND "NEW INVENTIONS" THE LIST COULD BE EXTENDED ALMOST INDEFINITELY; IN FACT, ONE HISTORIAN OF SCIENCE COMPILED A LIST OF OVER 150 WORKS -- ALL TREATING TOPICS IN SCIENCE, MEDICINE, OR TECHNOLOGY -- WITH THE WORD 'NEW' IN THE TITLE WHAT IS ESPECIALLY INTERESTING IS THAT ALMOST ALL OF THESE WORKS DATE FROM AFTER 1550 AND THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE FROMAFTER 1600 CLEARLY THERE IS AN ELEMENT OF FASHION IN HOW AUTHORS CHOOSETITLES TO ADVERTISE THEIR BOOKS BUT WHAT THIS TREND TOWARD THE USE OF 'NEW' IN TITLES OF SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS SIGNIFIES IS NOT SIMPLY A PASSING FADE, BUTA FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT IN THE VALUES AND IDEALS OF THE SCIENTIFIC ENTERPRISE GIVEN THE VENERATION IN WHICH HUMANIST SCHOLARS HELD ANTIQUITY, THE SUDDEN EMERGENCE AND ACCEPTANCE OF 'THE NEW' INTHE TITLES OF BOOKS REPRESENTS A REMARKABLE SHIFT IN SENSIBILITIES AT ABOUT THE SAME TIME AS THE SUDDEN GROWTH IN THE USE OF THEWORD 'NEW' IN BOOK TITLES, AUTHORS BEGAN REFERRING TO THE 'NEWSCIENCE' OR 'NEW PHILOSOPHY' WHAT WAS MEANT BY THIS VARIED CONSIDERABLY; BUT WHAT SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN A CONSTANT FEATURE WAS THAT THIS WAS NOT A PEJORATIVE LABEL NOVELTY WAS NOT A BAD THING, INDEED IT SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN A SIGN OF A VERY GOOD THING NOW IF WE THINK ABOUT THE CHARATER OF MODERN SCIENCE -- that is, science in the 20th century -- CERTAINLY ONE OF THE MOST STRIKING ASPECTS IS THE OVERWHELMING PRESSURE PLACED ON RESEARCHERS TO PRODUCE SOMETHING NEW IN FACT, WE TEND TO THINK THAT IF IT IS NOT NEW, IT CANNOT BE SCIENCE -- OR AT LEAST NOT GOOD SCIENCE IN ALMOST ALL SCIENTIFIC FIELDS CHANGE IS RAPID, AND SO WHAT IS NEWEST -- TECHNIQUES, DISCOVERIES, THEORIES, OR WHAT HAVE YOU -- ISUNDERSTOOD TO BE THE BEST, THE MOST ADVANCED, THE MOST ENCOMPASSING INDEED, THE ENTIRE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY IS DESIGNED TO FASCILITE THE MOST RAPID DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION POSSIBLE SINCE THE NEWEST INFORMATION IS THE MOST CRUCIAL NOW THIS TREMENDOUS INSTITUTIONALIZED THRIST FOR NOVELTY HADTO COME FROM SOMEWHERE; AND I THINK WE BEGIN TO SEE THE EMERGENCE OF THIS IN THE LATE 16TH AND ESPECIALLY IN THE EARLY 17TH CENTURIES I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT THE OPENNESS OF THE 'NEW SCIENCE' TO NOVELTY IS ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT TRANSFORMATIONS IN THEVALUES AND IDEALS OF THE SCIENTIFIC ENTERPRISE WHAT EMERGES IS A SET OF VALUES, REINFORCED BY INSTITUTIONAL AND SOCIAL STRUCTURES, THAT REWARD THE NATURAL PHILOSOPHER FOR THE CREATION OF NEW KNOWLEDGE CONTRAST THE VALUES OF THE 'NEW SCIENCE' WITH THE VALUES OF EITHER THE SCHOLASTIC OR THE HUMANIST THE SCHOLASTIC ENTERPRISE WAS DEDICATED ALMOST ECLUSIVELY TOMASTERING A CANON OF CLASSICAL TEXTS; ANCIENT TEXTS; TEXTS THATHAD BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME THE HUMANIST, WHILE DESPISING THE CORRUPTIONS INTRIDUCED BY ILL-TRAINED SCHOLASTICS, ALSO SORT TO RECOVER THE LOST WISDOM OF THE PAST IN BOTH CASES, THE CENTRAL THRUST OF SCHOLARSHIP WAS DIRECTED TOWARD THE PRESERVATION OF THE OLD AND NOT THE GENERATION OF NOVELTY C. A NEW PROGRAMME FOR THE 'NEW SCIENCE' YET WE MUST BE CAREFUL WITH THE NOTION OF THE 'NEW SCIENCE', FOR EVEN IN THE 17TH CENTURY IT WAS STILL A QUITE DISPARATE ENTERPRISE THE NEW SCIENCE CERTAINLY INCLUDED THE 'NEW ASTRONOMY' BUT ITWAS NOT CLEAR IF THAT REFERRED TO THE ASTRONOMY OF COPERNCIUS, TYCHO, OR KEPLER BACON CALLS REPEATEDLY FOR A NEW NATURAL PHILOSOPHY AND PRESENTS HIS NEW METHOD OF INVESTIGATION YET THE SCIENCES HE HAS IN MIND IS NOT THE "NEW ASTRONOMY" OF KEPLER OR THE "NEW MECHANICS" OF GALILEO GALILEO, ON THE OTHER HAND, STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE "NEW ASTRONOMY" OF COPERNICUS BUT SEEMS TO HAVE IGNORED THE "NEW ASTRONOMY" OF KEPLER AND HE SEEMS NOT TO HAVE BEEN AWARE OF BACON'S "NEW ORGANON" NOW IT WOULD SEEM THAT THE ONLY THING ALL OF THESE "NEW SCIENCES" SHARED WAS THEIR RELATIVELY RECENT ORIGIN BUT SINCE THEY LACKED ANY KIND OF CONCEPTUAL COHESIVENESS, ITMAY SEEM DIFFICULT TO JUSTIFY CALLING THEM PARTS OF THE SAME "NEW SCIENCE" YET THERE IS ONE CHARACTERISTIC THAT IS COMMON TO EACH OF THESE PARTS -- AND THAT IS A BROADLY EMPIRICAL APPROACH KEPLER'S THEORETICAL BREAKTHROUGH IN ASTRONOMY DEPENDED IN A FUNDAMENTAL WAY ON TYCHO'S EXTENSIVE OBSERVATIONAL RECORD GALILEO, THOUGH NOT QUITE THE 'FATHER OF EXPERIMENTAL PHYSICS'HE IS SOMETIME CLAIMED TO BE, NEVERTHELESS SAW HOW EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE COULD BE USED RHETORICALLY TO CONVINCEHIS AUDIENCE FOR THE RATIONALIST DESCARTES, EXPERIMENT WAS TO BE EMPLOYED AS A MEANS OF TESTING AND DECIDING AMONG SEVERAL POSSIBLE MECHANICAL EXPLANATIONS AND FOR BACON, EXPERIMENTAL, OBSERVATION, AND THE GATHERING AND COLLECTING OF FACTS WERE TO FORM THE BASIS OF HIS REFORM OFALL NATURAL PHILOSOPHY EMPIRICAL EFFORT WAS THE KEY INGREDIENT IN HIS FORMULA FOR THELABOR-INTENSIVE REDEMPTION OF MANKIND NOW EVEN THOUGH 'EXPERIMENT' AND 'EMPIRICISM' MEANT SOMETHING DIFFERENT FOR EACH OF THESE MEN, THEY ARE ENOUGH ALIKE TO FORM A POSSIBLE UNIFYING FRAMEWORK FOR ALL THESE VARIOUS AND DISCONNECTED ACTIVITIES IT SEEMS THAT THE NOTION OF 'THE EXPERIMENTAL METHOD' RENDERED ITS GREATEST SERVICE AS A BANNER UNDER WHICH COULD BE UNITED A VARIETY OF DISTINCT ACTIVITIES AND PROCLAIMING ADHERENCE TO THE "EMPIRICAL METHOD" WAS A MEANS OF PROCLAIMING YOUR MEMBERSHIP IN THE NASCENT SOCIAL GROUPINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THE NEW SCIENCE IN OTHER WORDS, THE 'EXPERIMENTAL PHILOSOPHY' HELPED DESIGNATE A NEW PROGRAM OF UTILITARIAN, PRACTICAL, COOPERATIVE,AND OFTEN 'ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT' SCIENTIFIC PRACTICES