Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T20:16:57.133Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - The Legacy of the “Scientific Revolution”: Science and the Enlightenment

from Part I - Science and Society

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2008

By
Peter Reill
Edited by
Roy Porter
Roy Porter
Affiliation:
Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine, University College London
Get access

Summary

If there is one characterization of the Enlightenment that appears as a truism, it is the assertion that the Enlightenment adopted, extended, and completed the intellectual and social project usually characterized as the “Scientific Revolution,” a movement forged by Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) and Galilei Galileo (1564–1642), developed by René Descartes (1596–1650) and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716), and completed by Isaac Newton (1642–1727). In this view, the Enlightenment becomes both the inheritor of this legacy and its most persistent and dogmatic trustee. Because the Enlightenment is often seen as an age in which a “scientific paradigm” is accepted and transformed into “normal science,” the history of Enlightenment science has often been considered “a tiresome trough to be negotiated between the peaks of the seventeenth and those of the nineteenth century; or as a mystery, a twilight zone in which all is on the verge of yielding.” For many recent commentators even the twilight zone has been dispelled, revealing clear and close links between Enlightenment science and the “rational” imperatives of the Scientific Revolution, establishing the Enlightenment as the prototypical era in which scientific and instrumental reason became a defining characteristic of modern culture. These linkages between the Scientific Revolution, Enlightenment science, and a negative evaluation of modernity were first drawn by some intellectuals horrified by the destructiveness of modern civilization at the end of the Second World War. Max Horkheimer, for example, claimed in 1946 that “the collapse of a large part of the intellectual foundation of our civilization is … the result of technical and scientific progress.”

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge History of Science , pp. 21 - 43
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2003

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

Anonymous, , Traité des Extremes ou élements de la science de la réalité (Amsterdam, 1768).Google Scholar
Baader, Franz Xaver, Vom Wärmestoff, seine Verteilung, Bindung und Entbindung vorzüglich beim Brennen der Körper (Vienna, 1786).Google Scholar
Baker, Keith, Condorcet: From Natural Philosophy to Social Mathematics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975)Google Scholar
Barthez, Paul, Nouvelle Méchanique des mouvements de l’homme et des animaux (Carcassone, 1798), p. v.Google Scholar
Barthez, PaulNouveaux élements de la science de l’homme, 2 vols. (Montpellier, 1778).Google Scholar
Blumenbach, Johann Friedrich, Elements of Physiology, Caldwell, Charles (trans.), 2 vols. (Philadelphia, 1795), 1.Google Scholar
Blumenbach, , Ueber den Bildungstrieb, 2nd ed. (Göttingen, 1791).Google Scholar
Blumenbach, , Ueber den Bildungstrieb (Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1791).Google Scholar
Boyle, Robert, quoted by Westfall, Richard S., The Construction of Modern Science: Mechanism and Mechanists (Cambridge University Press, 1977).Google Scholar
Brian, Eric, La mesure de l’Etat: adminstrateurs et geometres au XVIIIe siecle (Paris: Albin Michel, 1994)Google Scholar
Burg, Peter, Kant und die Französische Revolution (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1974).Google Scholar
Cabanis, Pierre-Jean-Georges, Physiologie des weib-lichen Geschlechts, trans. Michaelis, Christian (Berlin, 1786).Google Scholar
Cabanis, Pierre-Jean-Georges, Coup d’Oeil sur les Revolutions et sur la Réforme de la Médecine (Paris, 1804).Google Scholar
Darnton, Robert, The Forbidden Best-Sellers of Pre-Revolutionary France (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995).Google Scholar
Daston, Lorraine, Classical Probability in the Enlightenment (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988).Google Scholar
Feder, Johann Georg Heinrich, Göttingische Anzeigen von gelehrten Sachen, (1786).Google Scholar
Ferguson, Adam, An Essay on the History of Civil Society, ed. Forbes, Duncan (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1966).Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, trans. Sheridan, Alan (New York: Random House, 1979).Google Scholar
Gough, J. B. “Lavoisier and the Fulfillment of the Stahlist Revolution,” in Donovan, Arthur (ed.), The Chemical Revolution: Essays in Chemical Revolution. Reinterpretation. Osiris, 2nd ser., vol. 4 (1988).Google Scholar
Hankins, Thomas L., “Eighteenth-Century Attempts to Resolve the Vis Viva Controversy,” Isis, 56 (1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horkheimer, Max, “Reason Against Itself: Some Remarks on Enlightenment,” in Schmidt, James (ed.), What Is Enlightenment? Eighteenth-Century Answers and Twentieth-Century Questions (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996).Google Scholar
Humboldt, , in Wilhelm von Humboldt Werke, eds. Flitner, Andreas and Giel, Klaus, 5 vols. (Stuttgart: J.G. Cotta’sche Buchhandlung, 1980–1), 1.Google Scholar
Humboldt, Wilhelm, “On the Historian’s Task,” History and Theory, 6 (1967).Google Scholar
Hume, David, The Philosophical Works, eds. Green, Thomas Hill and Grose, Thomas Hodge, 4 vols. (London, 1883), 3.Google Scholar
Iltis, Carolyn (Merchant), “D’Alembert and the Vis Viva Controversy,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, I (1970)Google Scholar
Iltis, , “Madam du Chatelet’s Metaphysics and Mechanics,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 8 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iltis, , “The Decline of Cartesianism in Mechanics: The Leibnizian-Cartesian Debates,” Isis, 64 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iltis, , “The Leibnizian-Newtonian Debates: Natural Philosophy and Social Psychology,” The British Journal for the History of Science, 6 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, Margaret C., The Radical Enlightenment: Pantheists, Freemasons, and Republicans (London: Allen & Unwin, 1981)Google Scholar
Jardine, Nicholas, “Naturphilosophie and the Kingdoms of Nature,” in Jardine, Nicholas, Secord, J. A., and Spary, Emma C. (eds.), Cultures of Natural History (Cambridge University Press, 1996)Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel, Critique of Pure Reason, trans. KempSmith, Norman (New York, 1965)Google Scholar
Karstens, W. J. G., Physische-chemische Abhandlung, durch neuere Schriften von hermetischen Arbeiten und andere neue Untersuchungen veranlasset, 2 vols. (Halle, 1786, 1787), 2.Google Scholar
Kielmeyer, Carl Friedrich, Gesammelte Schriften: In Natur und Kraft. Die Lehre von der Entwicklung organische Naturlehre, Holler, F. H. (ed.) (Berlin: Keiper, 1938).Google Scholar
Krohn, Wolfgang and Küppers, Günther, “Die natürlichen Ursachen der Zwecke: Kants Ansätze der Selbstorganisation,” Selbstorganisation: Jahrbuch für Komplexität in den Natur-, Sozial- und Geisteswissenschaften, 3 (1992).Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leclerc, George-Louis, Buffon, Comte, Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière, 36 vols. (Paris, 1749–89), 1.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm, quoted in Rather, L. J. and Frerichs, J. B., “The Leibniz-Stahl Controversy – I. Leibniz Opening Objections to the Theorie medica vera” Clio Medica, 3 (1968).Google Scholar
Merchant, Carolyn, The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology and the Scientific Revolution (New York: Harper and Row, 1980)Google Scholar
Metzger, Hélène, Newton, Stahl, Boerhaave et la Doctrine Chimique (Paris: Félix Alcan, 1930).Google Scholar
Newton, Isaac, Query 31 of the Optics, in Thayer, H. S. (ed.), Newton’s Philosophy of Nature: Selections from His Writings (New York: Hafner Press, 1953).Google Scholar
Oken, Lorenz, Abriss der Naturphilosophie: Bestimmt zur Grundlage seiner Vorlesungen über Biologie (Göttingen, 1805).Google Scholar
Papineau, David, “The Vis Viva Controversy: Do Meanings Matter ?” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 8 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popkin, and Zande, Johan, Skepticism in the Late Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Century (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1998).Google Scholar
Rousseau, G. S. and Porter, Roy (eds.), The Ferment of Knowledge: Studies in the Historiography of Eighteenth-Century Science (Cambridge University Press, 1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph, Erster Entwurf eines Systems der Naturphilosophie für Vorlesungen (Jena and Leipzig, 1799)Google Scholar
Schiller, Friedrich, quoted in Dewhurst, Kenneth and Reeves, Nigel (eds.), Frederick Schiller: Medicine, Psychology and Literature with the First English Edition of the Complete Medical and Physiological Writings (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978).Google Scholar
Schor, Noami, “French Feminism Is a Universalism,” Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies (1995)Google Scholar
Siegfried, Robert and Dobbs, Betty Jo in “Composition: A Neglected Aspect of the Chemical Revolution,” Annals of Science, 24 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stahl, Georg Ernst, Sudhoffs Klassiker der Medizin (Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth, 1961), 36Google Scholar
Thackray, Arnold, “Matter in a Nut-Shell: Newton’s Optics and Eighteenth-Century Chemistry,” Ambix, 15 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tonelli, Giorgio, “Analysis and Syntheses in XVIIIth Century Philosophy Prior to Kant” Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte, 20 (1976)Google Scholar
Tonelli, , “Critiques of the Notion of Substance Prior to Kant,” Tijdschrift voor Philosophie, 23 (1961)Google Scholar
Tonelli, , “The Philosophy of d’Alembert: A Sceptic beyond Sceptism,” Kantstudien, 67 (1976).Google Scholar
Toulmin, Stephen, Cosmopolis: The Hidden Agenda of Modernity (New York: Free Press, 1990).Google Scholar
Vartanian, Aram, La Méttrie’s L’Homme Machine: A Case Study in the Origins of an Idea (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1960).Google Scholar
Yates, Frances A., The Rosicrucian Enlightenment (London: Routledge, 1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×