Animism and natural teleology from Avicenna to Boyle.

IF 0.3 4区 哲学 Q2 Arts and Humanities Science in Context Pub Date : 2021-03-01 DOI:10.1017/S0269889722000035
Jeff Kochan
{"title":"Animism and natural teleology from Avicenna to Boyle.","authors":"Jeff Kochan","doi":"10.1017/S0269889722000035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Historians have claimed that the two closely related concepts of animism and natural teleology were both decisively rejected in the Scientific Revolution. They tout Robert Boyle as an early modern warden against pre-modern animism. Discussing Avicenna, Aquinas, and Buridan, as well as Renaissance psychology, I instead suggest that teleology went through a slow and uneven process of rationalization. As Neoplatonic theology gained influence over Aristotelian natural philosophy, the meaning of animism likewise grew obscure. Boyle, as some historians have shown, exemplifies this uneven process. There is an unresolved tension between his religious convictions and the implicit animism of his empirical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":49562,"journal":{"name":"Science in Context","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science in Context","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269889722000035","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Historians have claimed that the two closely related concepts of animism and natural teleology were both decisively rejected in the Scientific Revolution. They tout Robert Boyle as an early modern warden against pre-modern animism. Discussing Avicenna, Aquinas, and Buridan, as well as Renaissance psychology, I instead suggest that teleology went through a slow and uneven process of rationalization. As Neoplatonic theology gained influence over Aristotelian natural philosophy, the meaning of animism likewise grew obscure. Boyle, as some historians have shown, exemplifies this uneven process. There is an unresolved tension between his religious convictions and the implicit animism of his empirical practice.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
万物有灵论和自然目的论,从阿维森纳到波义耳。
历史学家声称,万物有灵论和自然目的论这两个密切相关的概念在科学革命中都被断然拒绝了。他们把罗伯特·博伊尔吹捧为反对前现代万物有灵论的早期现代守护者。在讨论阿维森纳、阿奎那和布里丹,以及文艺复兴时期的心理学时,我认为目的论经历了一个缓慢而不平衡的理性化过程。随着新柏拉图主义神学对亚里士多德自然哲学的影响,万物有灵论的意义也变得模糊起来。一些历史学家指出,波义耳就是这种不平衡过程的例证。在他的宗教信仰和他的经验实践中隐含的万物有灵论之间存在着一种未解决的紧张关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Science in Context
Science in Context 综合性期刊-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Science in Context is an international journal edited at The Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas, Tel Aviv University, with the support of the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute. It is devoted to the study of the sciences from the points of view of comparative epistemology and historical sociology of scientific knowledge. The journal is committed to an interdisciplinary approach to the study of science and its cultural development - it does not segregate considerations drawn from history, philosophy and sociology. Controversies within scientific knowledge and debates about methodology are presented in their contexts.
期刊最新文献
Modernism, modernity, and politics in the general history of science: Implications of Herbert Mehrtens' work, from "Vienna 1900" to the Nazi era, and beyond. Brouwer and Hausdorff: On reassessing the foundations crisis George Montandon, the Ainu and the theory of hologenesis Textual materiality and abstraction in mathematics The animal model of human disease as a core concept of medical research: Historical cases, failures, and some epistemological considerations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1