Newton and Empiricism ed. by Zvi Biener and Eric Schliesser (review)

The editors’ introduction to this volume begins by noting a difficulty. On the one hand, it seems obvious that Newton is an empiricist. On the other hand, understanding Newton as an empiricist is difficult for two reasons. First, empiricism (like so many “–isms”) is an amorphous concept. Offering a precise definition is difficult. Second, Newton’s thought is itself highly complex, hotly debated, and multi-faceted. Nonetheless, the editors claim, there is value to investigating the relationship between Newton and empiricism, and the goal of the volume is to help construct a narrative that can make sense of this relationship.

The ten contributions are arranged into three sections. The first section focuses on “The Roots of Newton’s Experimental Method.” Gaukroger, using case studies from Boyle and Newton, argues that empiricism developed as a result of “experimental” natural philosophers attempting to analyze and explain phenomena while bracketing questions about the underlying metaphysics. This attempt to free natural philosophy from the need to be grounded in metaphysical commitments was then enshrined in Locke’s Essay. Jalobeanu supplies a careful analysis of the nature of Baconian natural history and then applies this analysis to Newton’s early paper on light and colors. She argues that puzzling features of the paper can be explained if we read it as a Baconian natural history. Hamou, relying primarily on Newton’s student notebook, claims that Newton developed an account of the nature of vision. He then shows how this account does important work at a key point in the Opticks.

The second section deals with “Newton and ‘Empiricist’ Philosophers.” The first two papers discuss the impact of Newtonian ideas on Locke’s philosophy. Downing, building on some of her previous work, examines Locke’s matter theory. Focusing on Locke’s comments about gravitation and creation ex nihilo, she shows that thinking about Locke in light of Newton can afford us a deeper understanding of his metaphysics. Gorham and Slowik focus on space and time. They show that Locke’s acceptance of absolute space and time was likely influenced by Newton. But they also note that Locke had a principled objection to Newton’s claim that time could be accurately measured. The next two papers offer different analyses of Hume’s debt to Newton. Hazony attempts to vindicate Hume’s claim to have provided a complete system of the sciences in the Treatise. He uses, among other sources, Newton’s Principia to show that the Treatise fits contemporary models of a scientific system. Demeter, by contrast, suggests that the Opticks, rather than the Principia, should be our focus. For him, it is the tradition of experimentation stemming from the Queries to the Opticks that provides the proper background for understanding Hume’s methodology.

The final section has as its topic “Newtonian Method in 18^th, 19^th, and 20^th Century Science.” Nyden’s fascinating contribution focuses on the role that experiments played in physics for two Leiden professors, the Cartesian De Volder and the Newtonian ’s Gravesande. She shows that both employed experiments as an essential component of their teaching despite their very different theoretical and methodological commitments. Wolfe’s wide-ranging essay focuses on the relationship between Newtonianism and those studying the medical and life sciences in the eighteenth century. He develops both an “analogical” framework for thinking about the topic as well as a useful taxonomy of different ways in which Newtonian methodology was appropriated. Smith’s lengthy contribution resists simple summary. His general goal is to say something about the nature of gravitational research in the period between the Principia and the development of general relativity. He argues that researchers were not employing a hypothetico-deductive methodology but instead employed a more sophisticated method, one with major epistemological benefits.

All of the contributors to the volume are well-established experts and the generally high quality of the papers reflects this. But there is a question about the relationship of the parts to...