Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:52:13.650Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Descartes’s Epistemic Commitment to Telescopes and Microscopes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2018

GEORGE J. AULISIO
GEORGE J. AULISIO*
Affiliation:
University of Scranton
*
*<[email protected]>
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the Optics, Descartes claims that telescopes and microscopes lead to morally certain knowledge. It is unclear, however, that Descartes’s expressed confidence in these instruments is warranted. In this article, I show how a limited range of telescope and microscope observations could lead to morally certain knowledge for Descartes, and how observations beyond this range admit of enough reasonable doubt to undermine moral certainty. I also explain moral certainty as a form of knowledge in Descartes’s scientific practices, his epistemic commitment to optical instruments, and I offer an explanation for why Descartes never used optical instruments in his scientific endeavours.

Dans la Dioptrique, Descartes prétend que les télescopes et les microscopes donnent accès à des connaissances moralement certaines. Cependant, il n’est pas certain que la confiance accordée par Descartes à ces instruments soit justifiée. Dans cet article, je montre comment une gamme limitée d’observations effectuées à l’aide d’instruments d’optique pourraient mener aux connaissances moralement certaines pour Descartes, et comment d’autres observations allant au-delà de cette gamme introduisent suffisamment de doute raisonnable pour saper cette certitude morale. Enfin, j’interprète la certitude morale comme une forme de connaissance dans l’empirisme de Descartes, j’explique son engagement épistémique envers les instruments d’optique, et j’éclaire les raisons pour lesquelles il n’a jamais employé d’instruments d’optique dans ses propres recherches scientifiques.

Keywords

Descartestelescopesmoral certaintyCartesian scienceCartesian epistemologyreasonable doubtprobability
Type
Original Article/Article original
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 58 , Issue 3 , September 2019 , pp. 405 - 437
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2018 

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.)

References

Ariew, Roger 2010 “The New Matter Theory and Its Epistemology: Descartes (and Late Scholastics) on Hypotheses and Moral Certainty,” in Vanishing Matter and the Laws of Nature: Descartes and Beyond, edited by Jalobeanu, Dana and Anstey, Peter R.. London: Routledge, pp. 31–46.Google Scholar
Arnauld, Antoine, and Nicole, Pierre 1996 Logic or the Art of Thinking, edited by Buroker, Jill Vance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayers, Michael 1998 “Theories of Knowledge and Belief,” in The Cambridge History of Seventeenth-Century Philosophy, edited by Garber, Daniel and Ayers, Michael. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1003–1061.Google Scholar
Baker, Gordon, and Morris, Katherine J. 2004 “The Meditations and the Logic of Testimony.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 12 (1): 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biagioli, Mario 2001 “Replication or Monopoly? The Economies of Invention and Discovery in Galileo’s Observations of 1610,” in Galileo in Context, edited by Renn, Jürgen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 277–320.Google Scholar
Burnett, D. Graham 2005 Descartes and the Hyperbolic Quest: Lens Making Machines and Their Significance in the Seventeenth Century. Philadelphia: Transactions of the American Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
Castellani, Carlo 1973 “Spermatozoan Biology from Leeuwenhoek to Spallanzani.” Journal of the History of Biology 6 (1): 37–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cavendish, Margaret 1992 The Description of a New World, Called the Blazing-World and Other Writings, edited by Lilley, Kate. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Cavendish, Margaret 2001 Observations Upon Experimental Philosophy, edited by O’Neil, Eileen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Desmond 1982 Descartes’ Philosophy of Science. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
Clarke, Desmond 1992 “Descartes’ Philosophy of Science and the Scientific Revolution,” in The Cambridge Companion to Descartes, edited by Cottingham, John. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 258–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coady, C.A.J. 2002 Testimony: A Philosophical Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Curley, Edwin M. 1978 Descartes Against the Skeptics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daston, Lorraine 1998 “Probability and Evidence,” in The Cambridge History of Seventeenth-Century Philosophy, edited by Ayers, Michael and Garber, Daniel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1108–1144.Google Scholar
Descartes, René 1964 Oeuvres De Descartes, edited by Adam, Charles and Tannery, Paul. 11 vols. Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin.Google Scholar
Descartes, René 1991 The Philosophical Writings of Descartes: The Correspondence, edited by Cottingham, John, Stoothoff, Robert, Murdoch, Dugald, and Kenny, Anthony. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Descartes, René 2001 Discourse on Method, Optics, Geometry, and Meteorology, edited by Olscamp, Paul. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.Google Scholar
Descartes, René 2009 The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, edited by Cottingham, John, Stoothoff, Robert, and Murdoch, Dugald. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Frankfurt, Harry 2008 Demons, Dreamers, and Madmen: The Defense of Reason in Descartes’s Meditations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Galilei, Galileo 1890–1909 Le Opere di Galileo Galilei, Edizione Nationale, edited by Favaro, Antonio. 20 vols. Florence: G. Barbera.Google Scholar
Garber, Daniel 2001 Descartes Embodied: Reading Cartesian Philosophy Through Cartesian Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gelfert, Axel 2006 “Kant on Testimony.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 14 (4): 627–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacking, Ian 1985 “Do We See Through a Microscope?,” in Images of Science: Essays on Realism and Empiricism with a Reply from Bas C. van Fraassen, edited by Churchland, Paul M. and Hooker, Clifford A.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 132–152.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian 2006 The Emergence of Probability: A Philosophical Study of Early Ideas About Probability, Induction and Statistical Inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatfield, Gary 1988 “Science, Certainty, and Descartes.” PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 2: 249–262.Google Scholar
Hatfield, Gary 2014 The Routledge Guidebook to Descartes’ Meditations. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Henry C. 1979 The History of the Telescope. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Kingslake, Rudolf, and Barry Johnson, R. 2010 Lens Design Fundamentals. London: Elsevier/Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1977 The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, Nick 2015 “The Unseen World: Reflections on Leeuwenhoek (1677) ‘Concerning Little Animals.’” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 370 (1666): 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laudan, Larry 1984 Science and Values. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Lennon, Thomas 2016 “Clarity and Distinctness,” in The Cambridge Descartes Lexicon, edited by Nolan, Lawrence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 118–123.Google Scholar
Locy, William A. 1923 “Primitive Microscopes and Some Early Observations.” Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 42 (2): 95–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longino, Helen E. 1996 “Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Values in Science: Rethinking the Dichotomy,” in Feminism, Science, and the Philosophy of Science, edited by Nelson, Lynn Hankinson and Nelson, Jack. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 39–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miniati, Mara, Greco, Vincenzo, Molesini, Giuseppe, and Quercioli, Franco 1994 “Examination of an Antique Telescope.” Nuncius 9 (2): 677–682.Google Scholar
Morris, Katherine 2002 “Bêtes-machines,” in Descartes’ Natural Philosophy, edited by Gaukroger, Stephen, Schuster, John, and John Sutton. London: Routledge, pp. 401–419.Google Scholar
Morris, Katherine 2016 “Certainty,” in The Cambridge Descartes Lexicon, edited by Nolan, Lawrence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 100–103.Google Scholar
Ranea, Alberto Guillermo 2002 “A ‘Science for Honnêtes Hommes’: La Recherche de la Vérité and the Deconstruction of Experimental Knowledge,” in Descartes’ Natural Philosophy, edited by Gaukroger, Stephen, Schuster, John, and Sutton, John. London: Routledge, pp. 313–329.Google Scholar
Ribe, Neil M. 1997 “Cartesian Optics and the Mastery of Nature.” Isis 88 (1): 42–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schachter, Jean-Pierre 2005 “Descartes, Divine Veracity, and Moral Certainty.” Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review 44 (1): 15–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serjeantson, Richard W. 1999 “Testimony and Proof in Early-Modern England.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 30 (2): 195–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven 1994 A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seventeenth-Century England. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Barbara J. 1983 Probability and Certainty in Seventeenth-Century England: A Study of the Relationships Between Natural Science, Religion, History, Law, and Literature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Barbara J. 1986 “‘To A Moral Certainty’: Theories of Knowledge and Anglo-American Juries 1600-1850.” Hastings Law Journal 38 (1): 153–193.Google Scholar
Sorrell, Tom 2016 “Knowledge (Scientia),” in The Cambridge Descartes Lexicon, edited by Nolan, Lawrence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 423–428.Google Scholar
Turner, Gerard L’Estrange 1969 “The History of Optical Instruments: A Brief Study of Sources and Modern Studies.” History of Science 8 (1): 53–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, Gerard L’Estrange 2003 “Eighteenth-Century Scientific Instruments and Their Makers,” in Cambridge History of Science, edited by Porter, Roy. 6 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 509–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van de Pitte, Frederick P. 1988 “Intuition and Judgment in Descartes’ Theory of Truth.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 26 (3): 453–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Fraasseen, Bas C. 1980 The Scientific Image. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Helden, Albert 1974 “The Telescope in the Seventeenth Century.” Isis 65 (1): 38–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Leeuwenhoek, Antoni 1941 lle de Brieven van Antoni van Leeuwenhoek : Uitgegeven, Geïllustreerd en van Aanteekeningen Voorzien door een Commissie van Nederlandsche Geleerden. 19 vols. Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Vinci, Thomas C. 1998 Cartesian Truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Catherine 1995 The Invisible World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar