5 ms·
Newton for Ladies (1737) – Newtonianism vs. Cartesianism
- HPsquared 1y agoFull text (I assume this is out of copyright!) https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_newtonianismo-per-le-da_algarotti-francesco_1739_1 https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_newtonian...
- srean 1y agoCartesianism may be highly injurious to the ladies' dog. Quip aside, the history of science of that period just overwhelms me. What a time ! Galileo, DesCartes, Barrow, Leibnitz, Huygens, Newton, Halley, Hooke.
- OJFord 1y agoProgress today seems typically more industrial, but I'm sure you could likewise look back in the future and say Good heavens! Musk, Bezos, Altman, Jobs, Ive, Knuth (or extend the period for Turing, von Neumann, Brooks bros.)! The 'Great Man' fallacy no doubt applies as well to Galileo et al. as it would more obviously be someone's objection to my contemporary list.
- amelius 1y agoYou named some people who don't belong in the same sentence.
- OJFord 1y agoMy first sentence explained the shift. My last sentence anticipated your complaint.
- AfterHIA 1y agoIf you compare our predecessor Turing to people like Musk or Bezos ever again I'll have you chemically castrated.
- srean 1y agoTuring, Shannon, Neumann definitely but Musk et al ? really ? I consider their contribution to the body of human knowledge or humanity to be of quite dubious merit. Very smart and successful businessman for sure, very good at enriching themselves, but that's about it. At best they can be compared to Rockefeller, Edison, that too at best. On the other hand one can argue that a lot of our material welfare (as a product of science and engineering) is a direct consequence of Newton's accomplishments. Of course he did not start the fire all by himself.
- geye1234 1y agoI recommend "The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science" by E.A. Burtt if you're interested in that period. It discusses both the science, and the different philosophies of physics that were informing and perhaps influencing them. The book is a hundred years old but very readable.
- srean 1y agoThanks for the reference.