Skip to main content

Part of the book series: The University of Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science ((WONS,volume 12))

Abstract

Everyone is enough of an empiricist to believe that we learn from experience and no one is so far removed from rationalism as to deny that ideas play a vital role in the theories we construct about the world. But it is only too easy, and perhaps too tempting, for philosophers with a pronounced empiricist or rationalist bias to caricature the position of their opponents and make them appear as holding ludicrously simplistic views about the nature of scientific knowledge. In fact, any philosophical position worth its salt has a built-in flexibility or a power to accommodate, sometimes with surprising comfort, theses that seem central to rival theories. The Leaning Tower experiment, however fictitious, is equally well explained by rationalists or empiricists. Facts, however hard or obdurate, have a way of lending themselves to varying interpretations. Properly marshalled, they can be enlisted to serve any good philosophical cause.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Oliver Lodge, The Pioneers of Science [1893]. New York: Dover 1960, pp. 90–92. In his De Motu, written while he was in Pisa (1589–1592), Galileo mentions objects dropped from high towers, but he reaches the erroneous conclusion that the velocity is determined by the specific gravity of the body and that, hence, a ball of iron will fall faster than a ball of wool of the same weight.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ernst Mach, The Science of Mechanics, translated by Thomas J. McCormack. La Salle, Illinois: Open Court, 1960, p. 157.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Edward W. Strong, Procedure and Metaphysics [1936]. Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1966, p. 135.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Stillman Drake, ‘Galileo’s Experimental Confirmation of Horizontal Inertia: Unpublished Manuscripts (Galileo Gleanings XX.11)’, Isis 64 (1973), 291–305.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Karl R. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson, 1959, p. 107, n. *2.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ernst Mach, op. cit. (footnote 2), p. 161.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Galileo, Galilei, trans. by Henry Crew and Alphonso de Savio: [1914]. New York: Dover, 1953, p. 170. (In the Edizione Nazionale of Galileo’s Opere. Florence: Barberà, 1890–1909, Vol. VIII, p. 206).

    Google Scholar 

  8. This point is well made by Winifred L. Wisan, ‘The New Science of Motion: A Study of Galileo’s De motu locali’, Archive for History of Exact Sciences 13 (1974), 122–123.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Alexandre Koyré, ‘An Experiment in Measurement’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 97 (1953), 222–237.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Thomas B. Settle, ‘An Experiment in the History of Science’, Science 133 (1961), 19–23.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Stillman Drake, art. cit. (footnote 4), p. 291.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ronald Naylor, ‘Galileo and the Problem of Free Fall’, Brit. Journ. Hist. Sc. 7 (1974), 105–134.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Galileo, Two New Sciences, p. 178 (Edizione Nazionale, Vol. VIII, p. 212).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ibid., pp. 84–85 (Edizione Nazionale, Vol. VIII, pp. 128–129).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ronald Naylor, ‘Galileo’s Simple Revolution’, Physics 16 (1974), 33.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Galileo, Two New Sciences, pp. 254–255 (Edizione Nazionale, Vol. VIII, p. 277).

    Google Scholar 

  18. See Galileo’s letter of 29 November 1602 to Giuldobaldo del Monte, Edizione Nazionale of Galileo’s Opere, Vol. X, p. 97.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Galileo, Two New Sciences, p. 160 (Edizione Nazionale, Vol. VIII, p. 97).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ibid., p. 169 (Edizione Nazionale, Vol. VIII, 205).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ibid., p. 172 (Edizione Nazionale, Vol. VIII, p. 208).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Naylor, art. cit. (footnote 16), p. 37

    Google Scholar 

  23. Winifred L. Wisan, The New Science of Motion: A Study of Galileo’s De Motu locali’, Archive for History of Exact Sciences 13 (1974), 103–306.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ibid., p. 125, n. 15.

    Google Scholar 

  25. A. C. Crombie, ‘Sources of Galileo’s Early Natural Philosophy’ in M. L. Righini Bonelli and W. R. Shea (eds.), Reason, Experiment and Mysticism in the Scientific Revolution. New York: Science History Publications, 1973, pp. 157–175.

    Google Scholar 

  26. This is discussed in two recent articles by Stillman Drake, ‘Free Fall from Albert of Saxony to Honoré Fabri’, Stud. Hist. Phil. Science, 8 (1975), 347–366; ‘Impetus Theory Reappraised’, Journal of the History of Ideas XXXVI (1975), 27–46. Considerations analogous to those of Baliani were made as early as 1618 by Isaac Beeckman (Descartes, Oeuvres, edited by C. Adam and P. Tannery, 12 vols. and index, Paris: Vrin, 1956–1957, Vol. X, p. 61).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1977 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Shea, W.R. (1977). Galileo and the Justification of Experiments. In: Butts, R.E., Hintikka, J. (eds) Historical and Philosophical Dimensions of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science. The University of Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science, vol 12. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1780-9_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1780-9_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-8351-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-1780-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics