Abstract
At the beginning of the 18th century, Berkeley believed an anomaly pointed out by Isaac Barrow could be regarded as important evidence against the optical theories that had been established and standardized thanks to the works of Kepler and Newton. In this article, we want to show that Berkeley’s treatment of the Barrovian Case does not falsify these theories. We will contend that the strategy used by Berkeley to resolve the anomaly by alluding to a change of convention is a strategy that the classical theorist could use as well. In other words, the classical theorist could also appeal to a change of convention to deal with the problem.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 363-389 |
Number of pages | 27 |
Journal | Principia |
Volume | 24 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Nov 18 2020 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Philosophy
- History and Philosophy of Science