From Aristotle to Newton’s philosophical ideas

Authors

  • Georgios Kuriakou

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31686/ijier.vol11.iss9.4140

Keywords:

Philosophy, Aristotle, Newton, Motion, Teleology

Abstract

Aristotle and Isaac Newton employed different methods in their respective areas of study. Observation vs. Experimentation: Aristotle's method relied heavily on observation of the natural world. He believed that knowledge could be acquired through careful observation and categorization of phenomena. Newton, on the other hand, emphasized experimentation as a critical component of scientific inquiry. He conducted experiments to test his theories and used mathematical equations to describe the behavior of physical systems. Deduction vs. Induction: Aristotle's method involved deductive reasoning, where he would start with general principles and derive specific conclusions. He used syllogistic logic and relied on the principles of validity and soundness. Newton, in contrast, employed inductive reasoning. He would observe specific instances and patterns and then formulate general laws or theories based on those observations. Theoretical vs. Mathematical: Aristotle's approach was more theoretical and philosophical in nature. He sought to understand the underlying principles and causes of natural phenomena. While he did use some mathematics, his focus was on conceptual understanding. Newton, on the other hand, heavily employed mathematics in his work. He developed mathematical equations and formulas to describe and predict the behavior of physical systems. Geocentric vs. Heliocentric: Aristotle's worldview was geocentric, meaning he believed that the Earth was at the center of the universe. This influenced his understanding of celestial bodies and their motions. Newton, however, embraced the heliocentric model proposed by Copernicus, which placed the Sun at the center of the solar system. This shift in perspective influenced Newton's understanding of celestial mechanics. Influence on Methodology: Aristotle's method of observation and deduction had a significant impact on scientific thinking in ancient and medieval times. His approach laid the foundation for natural philosophy and influenced scientific thought for centuries. Newton's method of experimentation and mathematical analysis revolutionized the field of physics and laid the groundwork for the scientific method as we know it today. While Aristotle and Newton employed different methods, both made significant contributions to their respective fields and advanced our understanding of the natural world. Their methods reflect the intellectual and technological contexts of their times and have shaped the way science is conducted and understood.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

  • Georgios Kuriakou

    Secondary School

References

Aristotle. 1930. Physics, trans. R. P. Hardie and R. K. Gaye. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Ashley, Benedict. 2006. The Way toward Wisdom. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

DeWitt, Richard. 2004. Worldviews: An Introduction to the History and Philosophy of Science. Oxford: Blackwell.

Eddington, Arthur. 1963. The Nature of the Physical World. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

Wallace, William A. 1983. “Cosmological Arguments and Scientific Concepts.” In William A. Wallace, From a Realist Point of View: Essays on the Philosophy of Science, Second edition. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Bedau, Hugo. 1996. Thinking and Writing about Philosophy. Boston: Bedford Books of St. Martin's Press.

Earle, William James. 1992. Introduction to Philosophy. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc.

Aristoteles. Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature. United States Geological Survey.

Magee, Bryan. 2010. The Story of Philosophy. Dorling Kindersley. ISBN 978-0-241-24126-4.

Mason, Stephen F. 1979. A History of the Sciences. Collier Books. ISBN 978-0-02-093400-4. OCLC 924760574.

Downloads

Published

2023-09-01

How to Cite

Kuriakou, G. (2023). From Aristotle to Newton’s philosophical ideas. International Journal for Innovation Education and Research, 11(9), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.31686/ijier.vol11.iss9.4140
Received 2023-08-14
Accepted 2023-08-19
Published 2023-09-01