Works by Geoffrey Gorham
51 found
Order:
1 filter applied
DisambiguationsDisambiguations:
| Geoffrey Gorham [50] | Geoffrey A. Gorham [2] | Geoffrey Alexander Joseph Gorham [1] |
- Locke on Space, Time, and God.Geoffrey Gorham -2020 -Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 7.Locke is famed for his caution in speculative matters: “Men, extending their enquiries beyond their capacities and letting their thoughts wander into those depths where they can find no sure footing; ‘tis no wonder that they raise questions and multiply disputes”. And he is skeptical about the pretensions of natural philosophy, which he says is “not capable of being made a science”. And yet Locke is confident that “Our reason leads us to the knowledge of this certain and evident truth, (...) that there is an eternal, most powerful and most knowing being; which whether anyone will please to call God it matters not”. His certainty about the existence and attributes of God, I will argue, led him to surprisingly strong convictions about a deep and disputed problem at the intersection of seventeenth century metaphysics and natural philosophy: the absolute reality of space and time. Specifically, he based his absolutist conceptions of space and time on God’s literal omnipresence and eternity. Leibniz probably had Locke in mind when he inveighed in 1716 against “real absolute space, the idol of some modern Englishmen”. And Leibniz was right a decade earlier to voice through his mouthpiece Theophilus the suspicion that, despite Locke’s claim to know nothing about the substance of void space, “there are grounds for thinking you know more about it than you say or believe that you do. Some people have thought that God is the place of objects”. (shrink)
- The Theological Foundation of Hobbesian Physics: A Defence of Corporeal God.Geoffrey Gorham -2013 -British Journal for the History of Philosophy 21 (2):240 - 261.(2013). The Theological Foundation of Hobbesian Physics: A Defence of Corporeal God. British Journal for the History of Philosophy: Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 240-261. doi: 10.1080/09608788.2012.692663.
- Descartes on the Innateness of All Ideas.Geoffrey Gorham -2002 -Canadian Journal of Philosophy 32 (3):355 - 388.Though Descartes is traditionally associated with the moderately nativist doctrine that our ideas of God, of eternal truths, and of true and immutable natures are innate, on two occasions he explicitly argued that all of our ideas, even sensory ideas, are innate in the mind. One reason it is surprising to find Descartes endorsing universal innateness is that such a view seems to leave no role for bodies in the production of our ideas of them.
- Descartes on Time and Duration.Geoffrey Gorham -2007 -Early Science and Medicine 12 (1):28-54.Descartes' account of the material world relies heavily on time. Most importantly, time is a component of speed, which figures in his fundamental conservation principle and laws. However, in his most systematic discussion of the concept, time is treated as some-how reducible both to thought and to motion. Such reductionistic views, while common among Descartes' late scholastic contemporaries, are very ill-suited to Cartesian physics. I show that, in spite of the apparent identifications with thought and motion, Cartesian time retains—in the (...) form of what I will call 'successive duration'—precisely the intrinsic structure necessary to serve as an independent parameter of quantitative physics. As is often the case with Descartes, he gives the impression of embracing traditional doctrines while in fact radically transforming the underlying concepts to serve his scientific agenda. His theory of time, though formulated in Aristotelian terms, anticipates Newton in important respects. (shrink)
- How Newton Solved the Mind-Body Problem.Geoffrey A. Gorham -2011 -History of Philosophy Quarterly 28 (1):21-44.
- Cartesian causation: Continuous, instantaneous, overdetermined.Geoffrey Gorham -2004 -Journal of the History of Philosophy 42 (4):389-423.: Descartes provides an original and puzzling argument for the traditional theological doctrine that the world is continuously created by God. His key premise is that the parts of the duration of anything are "completely independent" of one another. I argue that Descartes derives this temporal independence thesis simply from the principle that causes are necessarily simultaneous with their effects. I argue further that it follows from Descartes's version of the continuous creation doctrine that God is the instantaneous and total (...) cause of everything that happens, and that this is just what his physics demands. But although God is the total cause of everything, he is not the only cause, since Descartes considers it obvious that finite minds have the power to move bodies. In the face of this apparent paradox, several recent commentators have suggested that Descartes accepted the late scholastic view that God and finite causes somehow collaborate or concur in the production of numerically identical effects. But close examination reveals that the case for Cartesian concurrentism is weak. Fortunately, there is a simpler and more fruitful solution to the problem of reconciling divine and human action. I argue that that in Descartes's world certain motions, such as voluntary movements of our bodies, are causally overdetermined This account allows Descartes to avoid occasionalism without embracing an elaborate metaphysics of secondary causality. Finally, I argue that the overdeterminist interpretation sheds new light on two longstanding problems of Cartesian metaphysics. First, it resolves a serious difficulty with a standard reading of Descartes's conception of human freedom. Second, it offers a novel approach to the old problem of reconciling genuine human action with the principle of the conservation of total quantity of motion. (shrink)
- Descartes’s Dilemma of Eminent Containment.Geoffrey Gorham -2003 -Dialogue 42 (1):3-.In his recent survey of the “dialectic of creation” in seventeenth-century philosophy, Thomas Lennon has suggested that Descartes’s assumptions about causality encourage a kind of “pantheistic emanationism”. Lennon notes that Descartes regularly invokes the principle that there is nothing in the effect which was not previously present, either formally or eminently, in the cause. Descartes also believes that God is the continuous, total, and efficient cause of everything. From these assumptions it should follow that everything that exists in the created (...) world is previously present in God. Indeed, Descartes embraces the emanationist doctrine explicitly when, at the end of his replies to the Second Set of Objections, he arranges the arguments of the Meditations in “geometrical fashion.” The demonstration of Proposition III includes a sub-proof of the proposition that “he who preserves me has within himself, either formally or eminently, whatever is in me”. Since God preserves the entire universe, it follows that everything is in him, either formally or eminently. While far from the radical Spinozistic view that God and the world are identical, the notion that everything in creation is also in God would seem to have its own unwelcome theological consequences, at least from a Cartesian point of view. In particular, it implies that extension, and hence divisibility, are in God. But, as Descartes himself cautions, “being divisible is an imperfection” and so completely foreign to God. (shrink)
- Newton on God's Relation to Space and Time: The Cartesian Framework.Geoffrey Gorham -2011 -Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 93 (3):281-320.Beginning with Berkeley and Leibniz, philosophers have been puzzled by the close yet ambivalent association in Newton's ontology between God and absolute space and time. The 1962 publication of Newton's highly philosophical manuscript De Gravitatione has enriched our understanding of his subtle, sometimes cryptic, remarks on the divine underpinnings of space and time in better-known published works. But it has certainly not produced a scholarly consensus about Newton's exact position. In fact, three distinct lines of interpretation have emerged: Independence: space (...) and time are not essentially related to God. Causation: space and time are caused by God. Assimilation: space and time are attributes of God. This paper defends the third interpretation against the first two by drawing out the under-appreciated influence of Descartes' metaphysics on Newton's ‘physico-theology’. (shrink)
- Descartes on God's relation to time.Geoffrey Gorham -2008 -Religious Studies 44 (4):413-431.God and time play crucial, intricately related roles in Descartes' project of grounding mathematical physics on metaphysical first principles. This naturally raises the perennial theological question of God's precise relation to time. I argue, against the strong current of recent commentary, that Descartes' God is fully temporal. This means that God's duration is successive, with parts ordered 'before and after', rather than permanent or 'all at once'. My argument will underscore the seamless connection between Descartes' theology and his physics, and (...) the degree to which he was prepared to depart from orthodoxy in the former in order to secure an a priori foundation for the latter. As Newton would later do, Descartes freed time from its traditional dependence on bodily motion and so removed an important barrier to making God temporal. Acting in time, God makes the physical world intelligible in a way He could not were He timeless. (shrink)
- The Language of Nature: Reassessing the Mathematization of Natural Philosophy in the Seventeenth Century.Geoffrey Gorham (ed.) -2016 - Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Although the mathematization of nature is a distinctive and crucial feature of the emergence of modern science in the seventeenth century, this volume shows that it was a far more complex, contested, and context-dependent phenomenon than the received historiography has indicated.0.
- Hobbes on the Reality of Time.Geoffrey Gorham -2014 -Hobbes Studies 27 (1):80-103.
- Mind-body dualism and the Harvey-Descartes controversy.Geoffrey Gorham -1994 -Journal of the History of Ideas 55 (2):211-234.Descartes and William Harvey engaged in a polite dispute about the cause of the heart's motion. Descartes saw the heart's motion of passive; Harvey saw it as active. I criticize three prominent explanations for Descartes' opposition to Harvey's theory. I argue that Descartes found Harvey's model to be inconsistent with mind-body dualism and this was the reason he opposed it.
- Introduction to Special Issue on Seventeenth Century Absolute Space and Time.Geoffrey Gorham &Edward Slowik -2012 -Intellectual History Review 22 (1):1-3.The articles that comprise this special issue of Intellectual History Review are briefly described.
- Infinity in Early Modern Philosophy.Igor Agostini,Richard T. W. Arthur,Geoffrey Gorham,Paul Guyer,Mogens Lærke,Yitzhak Y. Melamed,Ohad Nachtomy,Sanja Särman,Anat Schechtman,Noa Shein &Reed Winegar (eds.) -2018 - Cham: Springer Verlag.This volume contains essays that examine infinity in early modern philosophy. The essays not only consider the ways that key figures viewed the concept. They also detail how these different beliefs about infinity influenced major philosophical systems throughout the era. These domains include mathematics, metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, science, and theology. Coverage begins with an introduction that outlines the overall importance of infinity to early modern philosophy. It then moves from a general background of infinity up through Kant. Readers will learn (...) about the place of infinity in the writings of key early modern thinkers. The contributors profile the work of Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, and Kant. Debates over infinity significantly influenced philosophical discussion regarding the human condition and the extent and limits of human knowledge. Questions about the infinity of space, for instance, helped lead to the introduction of a heliocentric solar system as well as the discovery of calculus. This volume offers readers an insightful look into all this and more. It provides a broad perspective that will help advance the present state of knowledge on this important but often overlooked topic. (shrink)No categories
- ‘The Twin-Brother of Space’: Spatial Analogy in the Emergence of Absolute Time.Geoffrey Gorham -2012 -Intellectual History Review 22 (1):23-39.Seventeenth-century authors frequently infer the attributes of time by analogy from already established features of space. The rationale for this can be traced back to Aristotle's analysis of time as ?the number of movement?, where movement requires a prior understanding of spatial magnitude. Although these authors are anti-Aristotelian, they were concerned, contra Aristotle, to establish the existence of ?empty space?, and a notion of absolute space which fit this idea. Although they had no independent rationale for the existence of absolute (...) time, it seemed to go with absolute space, and they drew on a long tradition of space-time parallelism in securing this. (shrink)
- Locke and Newton on Space and Time and Their Sensible Measures.Edward Slowik &Geoffrey Gorham -2014 - In Zvi Biener Eric Schliesser,Newton and Empiricism. New York: Oxford University Press USA. pp. 119-137.It is well-known that Isaac Newton’s conception of space and time as absolute -- “without reference to anything external” (Principia, 408) -- was anticipated, and probably influenced, by a number of figures among the earlier generation of seventeenth century natural philosophers, including Pierre Gassendi, Henry More, and Newton’s own teacher Isaac Barrow. The absolutism of Newton’s contemporary and friend, John Locke, has received much less attention, which is unfortunate for several reasons. First, Locke’s views of space and time undergo a (...) dramatic evolution that mirrors the overall absolutist trend of the era. Second, there are good reasons to suppose that Locke was influenced late in this evolution by Newton’s Principia, which he read and reviewed shortly after its 1687 publication. It is even possible that Locke read or knew of the earlier and unpublished, though now famous, Newtonian tract De Gravitatione. Third, despite the influence of Newton, Locke’s retains a skeptical attitude concerning our empirical knowledge of absolute space and time. He is especially cautious about absolute time, bucking a widespread tendency to treat time as strongly analogous to space. Their disagreement about the measure of absolute time, we will suggest, reflects a deeper disagreement in the philosophy of science. While Locke counts as scientific knowledge only ideas and demonstrations derivable from immediate experience, Newton endorses a more theory-driven brand of empiricism, which holds that our best explanations of the phenomena provide genuine knowledge that goes beyond what we can directly observe. (shrink)
- Introduction.Geoffrey Gorham,Benjamin Hill &Edward Slowik -2016 - InThe Language of Nature: Reassessing the Mathematization of Natural Philosophy in the Seventeenth Century. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
- Descartes on the Infinity of Space vs. Time.Geoffrey Gorham -2018 - In Nachtomy Ohad & Winegar Reed,Infinity in Early Modern Philosophy. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. pp. 45-61.In two rarely discussed passages – from unpublished notes on the Principles of Philosophy and a 1647 letter to Chanut – Descartes argues that the question of the infinite extension of space is importantly different from the infinity of time. In both passages, he is anxious to block the application of his well-known argument for the indefinite extension of space to time, in order to avoid the theologically problematic implication that the world has no beginning. Descartes concedes that we always (...) imagine an earlier time in which God might have created the world if he had wanted, but insists that this imaginary earlier existence of the world is not connected to its actual duration in the way that the indefinite extension of space is connected to the actual extension of the world. This paper considers whether Descartes’s metaphysics can sustain this asymmetrical attitude towards infinite space vs. time. I first consider Descartes’s relation to the ‘imaginary’ space/time tradition that extended from the late scholastics through Gassendi and More. I next examine carefully Descartes’s main argument for the indefinite extension of space and explain why it does not apply to time. Most crucially, since duration is merely conceptually distinct from enduring substance, the end or beginning of the world entails the end or beginning of real time. In contrast, extension does not depend on any enduring substance besides itself. (shrink)
- Descartes on persistence and temporal parts.Geoffrey Gorham -2010 - In Joseph Keim Campbell, Michael O'Rourke & Harry S. Silverstein,Time and Identity. Bradford.This chapter discusses the “real distinction” between the mind and the body and a demonstration of the immortality of the soul as demonstrated in Descartes’s Meditations. Early readers of Descartes’s work like Arnauld and Mersenne rejected the idea on the grounds that “it does not seem to follow from the fact that the mind is distinct from the body that it is incorruptible or immortal.” In light of this, Descartes devised a more detailed proof of immortality based on two assumptions (...) not made explicit in the six meditations. These two assumptions are discussed in this chapter, together with the difficulties that arise by making them. Descartes’s arguments are also examined vis-à-vis the metaphysical distinction between endurance and perdurance. (shrink)
- (1 other version)Causation and similarity in Descartes.Geoffrey Gorham -1999 - In Gennaro Rocco & Huenemann Charles,New Essays on the Rationalists. Oxford University Press. pp. 296--309.
- Leibniz on Time and Duration.Geoffrey Gorham -2017 - InProceedings, 2016 International Leibniz Society Meeting, Hanover, GE.
- Similarity as an Intertheory Relation.Geoffrey Gorham -1996 -Philosophy of Science 63 (5):S220-S229.In line with the semantic conception of scientific theories, I develop an account of the intertheory relation of comparative structural similarity. I argue that this relation is useful in explaining the concept of verisimilitude and I support this contention with a concrete historical example. Finally, I defend this relation against the familiar charge that the concept of similarity is insufficiently objective.
- Cartesian temporal atomism: A new defence, a new refutation.Geoffrey Gorham -2008 -British Journal for the History of Philosophy 16 (3):625 – 637.
- Hobbes and Evil.Geoffrey Gorham -2018 - In Chad Meister & Charles Taliaferro,Evil in Early Modern Philosophy. Routledge.
- Stewart Duncan, "Materialism from Hobbes to Locke.".Geoffrey Gorham -2024 -Philosophy in Review 44 (1):18-21.
- Norman Kemp Smith on the experience of duration.Geoffrey Gorham -2022 -British Journal for the History of Philosophy 31 (2):295-313.The Scottish philosopher Norman Kemp Smith (1872–1958) is best known for his 1929 English translation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, and for his incisive commentaries on Descartes, Hume, and Kant. These achievements have overshadowed his original philosophical work in several areas, including the experience of time. A realist with idealist sympathies, Kemp Smith developed a non-transcendental version of Kant’s conception of time as a ‘pure intuition’ (though he insisted that temporal perception involved ‘categories’). He employed this conception to solve (...) a problem that was widely discussed in early twentieth-century European and American philosophy, which William James dubbed the ‘specious present’: how can we perceive an extended duration, like a full golf swing, or the cadence of a brief tune, if we only perceive the present? A closely related problem: if we only ever perceive the present, how can we distinguish among the future, present, and past? In this paper, I explain Kemp Smith’s proposed solution, and compare it with two of his contemporary influences: Samuel Alexander and George F. Stout. Finally, I suggest that these problems are still with us, and are likely to be for some time, especially if we ignore the insights offered by earlier discussions. (shrink)
- Planck's principle and jeans's conversion.Geoffrey Gorham -1991 -Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 22 (3):471-497.
- Early American Immaterialism: Samuel Johnson's Emendations of Berkeley.Geoffrey Gorham -2018 -Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 54 (4):441.Richard Popkin opened an early paper with the observation "No figure in the history of European philosophy has had a more direct and enduring influence on American thought than George Berkeley."2 Popkin's case for Berkeley's "enduring" influence well into classical pragmatism is compelling.3 But in what follows I will be concerned with his more "direct" influence on the Connecticut philosopher and theologian Samuel Johnson —not to be confused with the English stone-kicking confuter of Berkeley—during Berkeley's brief, abortive Rhode Island sojourn (...) of 1729–31. Johnson studied classics and history at the nascent Yale College, until, "accidentally lighting on Lord Bacon's Instauratio Magna or Advancement of... (shrink)
- The Stoic Roots of Hobbes's Natural Philosophy and First Philosophy.Geoffrey Gorham -2021 - In Marcus P. Adams,A Companion to Hobbes. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 45–56.This chapter identifies three main sources of the Stoic elements in Hobbes's philosophy: the early Christian‐Stoic Tertullian, the modern “Neo‐Stoic” school of Justus Lipsius, and the natural philosophers of the Cavendish Circle he frequented. Perhaps the most direct Stoical impact on Hobbes was the second/third century Church Father Tertullian. Hobbes and Cavendish are at bottom kindred Stoic spirits, though their systems diverge on the precise nature of material activity. The chapter explores the Stoic character of Hobbesian space, time, causality, and (...) God, especially as these notions are employed in his natural philosophy. Hobbes's quasi‐realism about imaginary space is highly reminiscent of the Stoics' conception of pure space as one of the problematic “incorporeals.” The chapter shows that Hobbes's metaphysical views, though quite unorthodox in his day, served to buttress his overall materialist, empiricist, and mechanist program in natural philosophy. (shrink)
- Buffier on Time, Duration, and Existence.Miren Boehm &Geoffrey Gorham -forthcoming - In Anik Waldow & Darío Perinetti,Claude Buffier: Metaphysics, Common Sense, and Sociability. Oxford University Press.Export citation
Bookmark - David Hausman and Alan Hausman, Descartes's Legacy: Minds and Meaning in Early Modern Philosophy Reviewed by.Geoffrey Gorham -1998 -Philosophy in Review 18 (4):264-266.Export citation Bookmark
- Does Scientific Realism Beg the Question?Geoffrey Gorham -1996 -Informal Logic 18 (2).In a series of influential articles, the anti-realist Arthur Fine has repeatedly charged that a certain very popular argument for scientific realism, that only realism can explain the instrumental success of science, begs the question. I argue that on no plausible reading ofthe fallacy does the realist argument beg the question. In fact, Fine is himself guilty of what DeMorgan called the "opponent fallacy.".
- Early Modern Philosophical Theology in Great Britain.Geoffrey Gorham -1997 - In Charles Taliaferro & Philip L. Quinn,A Companion to Philosophy of Religion. Cambridge, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 124–132.This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Religious Knowledge: Skepticism, Fideism, Reasonableness Atheism and Deism Science and Religion Biblical Criticism and the History of Religion Materialism and Immaterialism God, Space, and Time Creation, Freedom, and Laws of Nature Works cited.
- From form to mechanism: Helen Hattab: Descartes on forms and mechanisms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, x+236 pp, US$ 90.00 HB.Geoffrey Gorham -2010 -Metascience 20 (2):287-290.From form to mechanism Content Type Journal Article DOI 10.1007/s11016-010-9455-7 Authors Geoffrey Gorham, Department of Philosophy, Macalester College, St. Paul, MN 55105, USA Journal Metascience Online ISSN 1467-9981 Print ISSN 0815-0796.No categories
- God and the natural world in the seventeenth century: Space, time, and causality.Geoffrey Gorham -2009 -Philosophy Compass 4 (5):859-872.The employment by seventeenth-century natural philosophers of stock theological notions like creation, immensity, and eternity in the articulation and justification of emerging physical programs disrupted a delicate but longstanding balance between transcendent and immanent conceptions of God. By playing a prominent (if not always leading) role in many of the major scientific developments of the period, God became more intimately involved with natural processes than at any time since antiquity. In this discussion, I am particularly concerned with the causal and (...) spatio-temporal relations between God and nature in the seventeenth century as recent scholarship has revealed how dramatically traditional conceptions of these relations were transformed by philosophers and scientists like Descartes, Malebranche, More, and Newton. (shrink)
- John Cottingham, Cartesian Reflections Reviewed by.Geoffrey Gorham -2010 -Philosophy in Review 30 (1):20-23.
- John Leslie, The End of the World: The Science and Ethics of Human Extinction Reviewed by.Geoffrey Gorham -1998 -Philosophy in Review 18 (2):122-124.Export citation Bookmark
- Mixing Bodily Fluids: Hobbes’s Stoic God.Geoffrey Gorham -2014 -Sophia 53 (1):33-49.The pantheon of seventeenth-century European philosophy includes some remarkably heterodox deities, perhaps most famously Spinoza’s deus-sive-natura. As in ethics and natural philosophy, early modern philosophical theology drew inspiration from classical sources outside the mainstream of Christianized Aristotelianism, such as the highly immanentist, naturalistic theology of Greek and Roman Stoicism. While the Stoic background to Spinoza’s pantheist God has been more thoroughly explored, I maintain that Hobbes’s corporeal God is the true modern heir to the Stoic theology. The Stoic and Hobbesian (...) gods are necessitarian, entirely corporeal, and thoroughly intermixed with ordinary bodies, while also supremely intelligent, providential, and good. And both gods serve as the ultimate source of diversity and change in a material world divested of Aristotelian forms and causes. Unfortunately, scholars on both sides of the long debate about the sincerity of Hobbes’s theism have not taken very seriously his late articulation of a corporeal theology. One probable reason for this dismissive attitude is a lack of thorough investigation of the historical precedents for such an unusual godhead available to Hobbes. The first part of this article attempts to establish a close congruence between the Stoic and Hobbesian gods. The second part traces the likely sources for Hobbes’s Stoic theology in his intellectual context. (shrink)
- No Title available: Dialogue.Geoffrey Gorham -2009 -Dialogue 48 (4):889-892.
- Proceedings, 2016 International Leibniz Society Meeting, Hanover, GE.Geoffrey Gorham (ed.) -2017No categoriesExport citation Bookmark
- Spinoza on the Ideality of Time.Geoffrey Gorham -2013 -Idealistic Studies 43 (1-2):27-40.When McTaggart puts Spinoza on his short list of philosophers who considered time unreal, he is falling in line with a reading of Spinoza’s philosophy of time advanced by contemporaneous British Idealists and by Hegel. The idealists understood that there is much at stake concerning the ontological status of Spinozistic time. If time is essential to motion then temporal idealism entails that nearly everything—apart from God conceived sub specie aeternitatis—is imaginary. I argue that although time is indeed ‘imaginary’—in a sense (...) ‘no one doubts’ as Spinoza says—there is no good reason to infer that bodies, the infinite modes, and conatus are imaginary in the same sense. To avoid this conflation, we need to follow Spinoza in carefully distinguishing between tempus and duratio. Duration is not only real; it has all the structure needed to ground Spinozistic motion, bodies and conatus. (shrink)
- The Concept of Truth in Feminist Sciences.Geoffrey Gorham -1995 -Hypatia 10 (3):99 - 116.If we view the aim of feminist science as truthlikeness, instead of either absolute or relative truth, then we can explain the sense in which the feminist sciences bring an objective advance in knowledge without implicating One True Theory. I argue that a certain non-linguistic theory of truthlikeness is especially well-suited to this purpose and complements the feminist epistemologies of Harding, Haraway, and Longino.
- The metaphysical roots of cartesian physics: The law of rectilinear motion.Geoffrey Gorham -2005 -Perspectives on Science 13 (4):431-451.: This paper presents a detailed account of Descartes' derivation of his second law of nature—the law of rectilinear motion—from a priori metaphysical principles. Unlike the other laws the proof of the second depends essentially on a metaphysical assumption about the temporal immediacy of God's operation. Recent commentators (e.g., Des Chene and Garber) have not adequately explained the precise role of this assumption in the proof and Descartes' reasoning has continued to seem somewhat arbitrary as a result. My account better (...) reveals the dependence of the second law on fundamental principles about time and causality. (shrink)
- John Locke & Natural Philosophy. [REVIEW]Geoffrey Gorham -2011 -Early Science and Medicine 16 (6):626-628.
- Andrew Janiak, ed. Space: A History. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020. Pp. 368. $105.00 (cloth); $26.95 (paper). ISBN 978-0-19-991410-4. [REVIEW]Geoffrey Gorham -2022 -Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 12 (1):322-325.
- Daniel Garber. Leibniz: Body, Substance, Monad. xxi + 428 pp., illus., bibl., index. Originally published in 2009. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. £35. [REVIEW]Geoffrey Gorham -2012 -Isis 103 (3):589-590.
- God, Time and Eternity. [REVIEW]Geoffrey Gorham -2002 -Faith and Philosophy 19 (4):520-523.
- Jonathan Edwards and the Metaphysics of Sin. [REVIEW]Geoffrey A. Gorham -2006 -Faith and Philosophy 23 (4):484-488.
- Review of Christia Mercer (ed.), Eileen O'Neill (ed.),Early Modern Philosophy: Mind, Matter, and Metaphysics. [REVIEW]Geoffrey Gorham -2005 -Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2005 (9).
- Stephen Gaukroger , Collapse of Mechanism and the Rise of Sensibility: Science and the Shaping of Modernity, 1680 -1760 . Reviewed by. [REVIEW]Geoffrey Gorham -2011 -Philosophy in Review 31 (4):274-277.
| 1 — 50 / 51 |
Off-campus access
Using PhilPapers from home?
Create an account to enable off-campus access through your institution's proxy server or OpenAthens.
Monitor this page
Be alerted of all new items appearing on this page. Choose how you want to monitor it:
 Email |  RSS feed |
Editorial team
General Editors:
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Area Editors:
David Bourget
Gwen Bradford
Berit Brogaard
Margaret Cameron
David Chalmers
James Chase
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Esa Diaz-Leon
Barry Hallen
Hans Halvorson
Jonathan Ichikawa
Monte Johnson
Michelle Kosch
Øystein Linnebo
Paul Livingston
Brandon Look
Manolo Martínez
Matthew McGrath
Michiru Nagatsu
Susana Nuccetelli
Giuseppe Primiero
Jack Alan Reynolds
Darrell P. Rowbottom
Aleksandra Samonek
Constantine Sandis
Howard Sankey
Jonathan Schaffer
Thomas Senor
Daniel Star
Jussi Suikkanen
Aness Kim Webster
Other editors
Contact us
Learn more about PhilPapers
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Area Editors:
David Bourget
Gwen Bradford
Berit Brogaard
Margaret Cameron
David Chalmers
James Chase
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Esa Diaz-Leon
Barry Hallen
Hans Halvorson
Jonathan Ichikawa
Monte Johnson
Michelle Kosch
Øystein Linnebo
Paul Livingston
Brandon Look
Manolo Martínez
Matthew McGrath
Michiru Nagatsu
Susana Nuccetelli
Giuseppe Primiero
Jack Alan Reynolds
Darrell P. Rowbottom
Aleksandra Samonek
Constantine Sandis
Howard Sankey
Jonathan Schaffer
Thomas Senor
Daniel Star
Jussi Suikkanen
Aness Kim Webster
Other editors
Contact us
Learn more about PhilPapers
Home |New books and articles |Bibliographies |Philosophy journals |About PhilPapers |API |Contact us |Code of conduct
PhilPapers logo byAndrea Andrews andMeghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see ourterms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications).Use of this site is subject toterms & conditions.
All rights reserved byThe PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-5b9ff6f457-t4pt2 uwo