Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T12:32:46.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On Pierre Duhem

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Steven J. Livesey
Steven J. Livesey
Affiliation:
Department of the History of ScienceUniversity of Oklahoma
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The publication of this volume appears to be the most recent in a group of works whose appearance marks renewed interest in Duhem. Over the past ten years, attention has been focused on Duhem's life (Jaki 1984), his physics (Jaki 1984; Nye 1986, 208–23), his philosophy of science (Jaki 1984, chap. 9; Paul 1979, chap. 5; Ariew 1984),' and his history of science (Jaki 1984, chap. 10; Martin 1976). But the significance of this translation is that - leaving aside To Save the Phenomena – for the first time we have a partial translation into English of one of the two great historical works that revitalized the study of medieval science.

Type
Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 1 , Issue 2 , September 1987 , pp. 363 - 370
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

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

Ariew, Roger, 1984. “The Duhem Thesis, ” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 35: 213–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avicenna, , (1977–1980.) Liber de philosophia prima, sive scientia divina, ed. van Riet, S., 2 vols., Louvain: E. Peeters; Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Clagett, Marshall, 1958. Isis 49: 359–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clagett, Marshall, 1962. Isis 53: 251–52.Google Scholar
Courtenay, William J., 1974. “Alexander Langley, O. F. M.,” Manuscripta 18: 96–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Courtenay, William J., 1984. “The Role of English Thought in the Transformation of University Education in the Late Middle Ages,” in Rebirth, Reform and Resilience. Universities in Transition 1300–1700, ed. Kittelson, James S., Transue, Pamela J., Columbus: Ohio State University Press, pp. 103–62.Google Scholar
de Rimini, Gregory, 1981. Lectura super primum et secundum Sententiarum, ed. Damasus Trapp, A. and Berlin, V. Marcolino New York: W. de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Duhem, Pierre, 1906. Etudes sur Leonard de Vinci: Ceux qu'il a lus et ceux qui I'ont lu. First Series, Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar
Duhem, Pierre, 1954. “Physics of a Believer,” in The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory, trans. Wiener, Philip P. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 299–311.Google Scholar
Duhem, Pierre, 1987.Prémices philosophiques, with an introduction in English by Jaki, Stanley L., Leiden: E. J. Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faral, Edmond, 1950. Buridan, Jean, maître és arts de l'université de Paris, Paris: Impr. nationale, pp. 80–111Google Scholar
Grant, Edward, 1971. Physical Science in the Middle Ages, New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Grant, Edward, 1982. Much Ado About Nothing, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Grant, Edward, 1984. “Were There Significant Differences Between Medieval and Early Modern Scholastic Natural Philosophy? The Case for Cosmology,” Nous 18: 5–14.Google Scholar
Henry of, Ghent, 1979. Opera Omnia, ed. Macken, Raymond, Leuven: University Press.Google Scholar
Heytesbury, William of, 1979. William of Heytesbury on “Insoluble” Sentences, trans. Spade, Paul Vincent, Toronto:Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies.Google Scholar
Heytesbury, William of, 1984. On Maxima and Minima. Chapter 5 of Rules for Solving Sophismata, with an Anonymous Fourteenth-Century Discussion, trans. Longeway, John, Dordrecht:Reidel.Google Scholar
Jaki, Stanley L., 1984. Uneasy Genius: The Life and Work of Pierre Duhem, The Hague: Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Lohr, Charles H., 1971. “Medieval Latin Aristotle Commentaries. Authors: Johannes de Kanthi-Myngodus,” Traditio 27: 251–351.Google Scholar
Long, Helen S., 1983. “Bodies and Angels: The Occupants of Place for Aristotle and Duns Scotus,” Viator 14: 245–66.Google Scholar
McEvoy, James, 1981. “Questions of Authenticity and Chronology Concerning Works Attributed to Robert Grosseteste and Edited 1940–1980,” Bulletin de philosophie médiévale 23: 64–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maier, Anneliese, 1982. On the Threshold of Exact Science: Selected Writings of Anneliese Maier on Late Medieval Natural Philosophy, ed. and trans. Sargent, Steven, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, R. N. D., 1976. “The Genesis of a Mediaeval Historian: Pierre Duhem and the Origins of Statics,” Annals of Science 33: 119–29.Google Scholar
Moody, Ernest A., 1975. ”Empiricism and Metaphysics in Medieval Philosophy, in Studies in Medieval Philosophy, Science and Logic. Collected Papers 1933–1969, Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 287–304.Google Scholar
Murdoch, John, 1969. “Mathesis in philosophiam scholasticam introducta:” The Rise and Development of the Application of Mathematics in Fourteenth-Century Philosophy and Theology,” in Arts libéraux et philosophic au moyen âge. Actes du lVe congrès international de philosophie médiévale. 27 Août-2 Septembre 1967. Montreal and Paris: J. Vrin,. pp. 215–54.Google Scholar
Murdoch, John, 1978. “The Development of a Critical Temper: New Approaches and Modes of Analysis in Fourteenth-Century Philosophy, Science, and Theology,” Medieval and Renaissance Studies 7: 51–79.Google Scholar
Nye, Mary Jo, 1986. Science in the Provinces: Scientific Communities and Provincial Leadership in France 1860–1930, Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 208–23.Google Scholar
Paul, Harry, 1979. The Edge of Contingency, Gainesville: University Presses of Florida.Google Scholar
Sarton, George, 1959. A History of Science: Hellenistic Science in the Last Three Centuries B. C., Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Stump, Eleonore, 1981. “Theology and Physics in De sacramento altaris: Ockham's Theory of Indivisibles”, in Infinity and Continuity in Ancient and Medieval Thought, ed. Norman Kretzmann, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Sylla, Edith, 1984. “Abstract of Comments. ‘Were There Significant Differences Between Medieval and Early Modern Scholastic Natural Philosophy?’ Content and Procedures”, Nous 18: 15–16.Google Scholar
Tachau, Katherine, 1982. “The Problem of species in medio in Oxford in the Generation after Ockham,” Mediaeval Studies 44: 394–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, William A., 1978. “Galileo and the Doctores Parisiensis,” in New Perspectives on Galileo, ed. Butts, R. E. and Pitt, J. C., Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 87–138; revised in Wallace 1981.Google Scholar
Wallace, William A., 1981. Prelude to Galileo. Essays on Medieval and Sixteenth-Century Sources of Galileo's Thought, Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 192–252.Google Scholar
Wallace, William A., 1984. Galileo and His Sources, Princeton: Princeton Univerity Press.Google Scholar
Weisheipl, James A., 1964. “Roger Swineshead, O. S. B., Logician, Natural Philosopher, and Theologian”, in Oxford Studies Presented to Daniel Callus, Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 231–52.Google Scholar