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.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
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.
Ernst Mach, The Science of Mechanics, translated by Thomas J. McCormack. La Salle, Illinois: Open Court, 1960, p. 157.
Edward W. Strong, Procedure and Metaphysics [1936]. Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1966, p. 135.
Stillman Drake, ‘Galileo’s Experimental Confirmation of Horizontal Inertia: Unpublished Manuscripts (Galileo Gleanings XX.11)’, Isis 64 (1973), 291–305.
Karl R. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson, 1959, p. 107, n. *2.
Ernst Mach, op. cit. (footnote 2), p. 161.
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).
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.
Alexandre Koyré, ‘An Experiment in Measurement’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 97 (1953), 222–237.
Thomas B. Settle, ‘An Experiment in the History of Science’, Science 133 (1961), 19–23.
Stillman Drake, art. cit. (footnote 4), p. 291.
Ronald Naylor, ‘Galileo and the Problem of Free Fall’, Brit. Journ. Hist. Sc. 7 (1974), 105–134.
Galileo, Two New Sciences, p. 178 (Edizione Nazionale, Vol. VIII, p. 212).
Ibid.
Ibid., pp. 84–85 (Edizione Nazionale, Vol. VIII, pp. 128–129).
Ronald Naylor, ‘Galileo’s Simple Revolution’, Physics 16 (1974), 33.
Galileo, Two New Sciences, pp. 254–255 (Edizione Nazionale, Vol. VIII, p. 277).
See Galileo’s letter of 29 November 1602 to Giuldobaldo del Monte, Edizione Nazionale of Galileo’s Opere, Vol. X, p. 97.
Galileo, Two New Sciences, p. 160 (Edizione Nazionale, Vol. VIII, p. 97).
Ibid., p. 169 (Edizione Nazionale, Vol. VIII, 205).
Ibid., p. 172 (Edizione Nazionale, Vol. VIII, p. 208).
Naylor, art. cit. (footnote 16), p. 37
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.
Ibid., p. 125, n. 15.
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.
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).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights 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