The logic and methodology of science in early modern thought : seven studies / Fred Wilson.

Enhanced descriptions from Syndetics:

A persuasive new argument and re-evaluation of the revolution in scientific thought in the 17th and 18th centuries by a senior academic in the history of modern philosophy and the philosophy of science.

Reviews provided by Syndetics

CHOICE Review

Veteran philosopher Wilson (Univ. of Toronto) illustrates his historical assertion concerning the scientific break from scholasticism by rationalist and empiricist philosophers from Descartes to Hume. He argues: "[There are] two central differences between the old and new methods. The one is that the two differ with regard to their cognitive ends. The other is that the methods themselves are very different, the one [new] aiming to use experience to eliminate falsehood ["eliminative induction"] and move towards truth and the other [old] aiming to abstract natures from experience." The extensive exegetical presentation is rich in often ignored intermediates and metaphysical agendas. Although neither as novel nor as definitive as Wilson claims, the theses frame a wonderfully detailed reconstruction of internal stresses in Scholasticism and the "incommensurable," but equally intractable tensions among the moderns. The prefatory qualification that "to claim that the views of Hume and of the logical positivists of the 1930s about the nature of causation and of explanation are largely correct" alerts critics to some adumbration in the arguments of Newton and whiggish anticipation of J.S. Mill , but also signals considerable courage and scholarship to defend currently unfashionable perspectives in the history of ideas. Highly recommended for research collections in philosophy and history of science. Upper-division undergraduates through faculty. P. D. Skiff; Bard College