3 ms·

I feel I must defend Aristotle. At least we would need a lot more information before we can conclude that Philoponos really knew what he was talking about. Of

I feel I must defend Aristotle. At least we would need a lot more information before we can conclude that Philoponos really knew what he was talking about. Of course he was right but for this to be effective there needs to be a theory and better experiments and that is what Galileo provided. I recommend Carlo Rovelli's essay on Aristotle's Physics: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.4057.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.4057.pdf.

coldtea 9y ago
>Of course he was right but for this to be effective there needs to be a theory and better experiments and that is what Galileo provided. It only needs the simple observation the kind of Philoponos did to refute Aristotle's thesis. And his arguments show that he knew what he was talking about -- very to the point. What would need "a theory and better experiments" would be to create a physics of falling -- Philoponos didn't do that (or said he did). He merely refuted Aristotle. We celebrate Democritus atomic theory for far less (as he did no experiments and it was just an idea he had).