Isaac Newton, Interdisciplinarian: Newton's cross-domain evidential reasoning

IF 1.3 2区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Brendan Fleig-Goldstein
{"title":"Isaac Newton, Interdisciplinarian: Newton's cross-domain evidential reasoning","authors":"Brendan Fleig-Goldstein","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2026.102154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper argues that Newton employed a non-hypothetical method of evidential reasoning called demonstrative induction in his chronological studies. In demonstrative induction, inductive risk is confined to the premises, and the secureness of the conclusion depends on the secureness of those premises. I show that Newton's approach to chronology exemplifies two key restrictions on demonstrative induction: (i) premises must themselves be supported by demonstrative induction or by inductive generalizations, and (ii) inductive risk should be confined to premises drawn from domains of inquiry whose claims are better established, thereby “exporting” inductive risk to more certain domains. Drawing on Newton's use of sources from history, biology, social science, and astronomy, I analyze how he transformed data from these fields into evidence for his chronological scheme. The strategy of exporting inductive risk, I argue, reveals a common evidential pattern across his natural-philosophical, historical, and theological work, and sheds light on the deeper methodological unity that underlies his otherwise disparate intellectual pursuits.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"117 ","pages":"Article 102154"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039368126000403","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper argues that Newton employed a non-hypothetical method of evidential reasoning called demonstrative induction in his chronological studies. In demonstrative induction, inductive risk is confined to the premises, and the secureness of the conclusion depends on the secureness of those premises. I show that Newton's approach to chronology exemplifies two key restrictions on demonstrative induction: (i) premises must themselves be supported by demonstrative induction or by inductive generalizations, and (ii) inductive risk should be confined to premises drawn from domains of inquiry whose claims are better established, thereby “exporting” inductive risk to more certain domains. Drawing on Newton's use of sources from history, biology, social science, and astronomy, I analyze how he transformed data from these fields into evidence for his chronological scheme. The strategy of exporting inductive risk, I argue, reveals a common evidential pattern across his natural-philosophical, historical, and theological work, and sheds light on the deeper methodological unity that underlies his otherwise disparate intellectual pursuits.
艾萨克·牛顿,跨学科:牛顿的跨领域证据推理。
本文认为,牛顿在他的年代研究中采用了一种非假设的证据推理方法,即论证归纳法。在论证归纳法中,归纳风险仅限于前提,结论的安全性取决于这些前提的安全性。我表明,牛顿的年表方法举例说明了论证归纳的两个关键限制:(I)前提本身必须得到论证归纳或归纳推广的支持,(ii)归纳风险应限于从主张得到更好确立的研究领域得出的前提,从而将归纳风险“输出”到更确定的领域。根据牛顿对历史、生物学、社会科学和天文学资料的使用,我分析了他如何将这些领域的数据转化为他的时间顺序计划的证据。我认为,输出归纳风险的策略在他的自然哲学、历史和神学著作中揭示了一个共同的证据模式,并揭示了更深层次的方法论统一,这种统一是他在其他方面不同的智力追求的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
166
审稿时长
6.6 weeks
期刊介绍: Studies in History and Philosophy of Science is devoted to the integrated study of the history, philosophy and sociology of the sciences. The editors encourage contributions both in the long-established areas of the history of the sciences and the philosophy of the sciences and in the topical areas of historiography of the sciences, the sciences in relation to gender, culture and society and the sciences in relation to arts. The Journal is international in scope and content and publishes papers from a wide range of countries and cultural traditions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书