Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-tldsr Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-11-04T02:08:51.675Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Commentary on Ernan McMullin, “The Impact of Newton's Principia on the Philosophy of Science”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

James R. Voelkel
James R. Voelkel*
Affiliation:
Dibner Institute for the History of Science and Technology
*
†Send reprint requests to the author, Dibner Institute for the History of Science and Technology, MIT E56–100, 38 Memorial Drive, Cambridge, MA 02139; email: jvoelkel@dibinst.mit.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Information

Type
Article Commentary
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 68 , Issue 3 , September 2001 , pp. 319 - 326
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aiton, Eric J. (1975), “Johannes Kepler and the Astronomy without Hypotheses”, Japanese Studies in the History of Science 14: 49–71.Google Scholar
Jardine, Nicholas (1984), The Birth of History and Philosophy of Science: Kepler's A Defence of Tycho Against Ursus with Essays on its Provenance and Significance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kepler, Johannes ([1609] 1992), New Astronomy. Translated by William H. Donahue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Originally published as Astronomia nova.Google Scholar
Koestler, Arthur (1959), The Sleepwalkers: A History of Man's Changing Vision of the Universe. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Koyré, Alexandre (1980), The Astronomical Revolution: Copernicus—Kepler—Borelli. Translated by R.E.W. Maddison. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
McMullin, Ernan (1990), “Conceptions of Science in the Scientific Revolution”, in Lindberg, David C. and Westman, Robert S. (eds.), Reappraisals of the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 27–92.Google Scholar
Stephenson, Bruce (1987), Kepler's Physical Astronomy. Studies in the History of Mathematics and Physical Sciences, 13. New York: Springer-Verlag.10.1007/978-1-4613-8737-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voelkel, James R. (1999), “Publish or Perish: Legal Contingencies and the Publication of Kepler's Astronomia Nova”, Science in Context 12: 33–59.10.1017/S0269889700003306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voelkel, James R. (2001), The Composition of Kepler's Astronomia Nova. Princeton: Princeton University Press, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Wilson, Curtis (1968), “Kepler's Derivation of the Elliptical Path”, Isis 59: 5–25.10.1086/350331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Curtis (1994), “Kepler's Laws, So-Called”, The Newsletter of the Historical Astronomy Division of the American Astronomical Society no. 31(May): 1–2.Google Scholar