Mediating actio in distans: Leibniz, Clarke and Newton on the communicability of forces

IF 0.3 0 PHILOSOPHY
Florian Sprenger
{"title":"Mediating actio in distans: Leibniz, Clarke and Newton on the communicability of forces","authors":"Florian Sprenger","doi":"10.1386/ejpc_00028_1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article revisits the debate between Leibniz and Clarke to explore conceptual shifts in the use of the term medium. A basic tenet of physics since antiquity says that every act of communication ‐ that is, every transmission of a force from the place of its cause to that of\n its effect ‐ requires a medium to ensure its interaction. In the context of the Early Modern Period, media were regarded as mediating instances that enabled communication. If these instances were not immediately connected but rather spatially separated from one another ‐ as in\n the case of gravitation, magnetism or electricity ‐ then there had to be a medium to ensure both the transmission of the force and the causal connection. Although the mediation of the medium took place in an inexplicable way, it seemed to explain one process or another by its mere introduction.\n The epistemological foundations of communicability ‐ those with which Leibniz, Clarke and Newton were attempting to come to terms ‐ remain relevant to the descriptive language with which we depict our present and its technological condition. Without duration there is no mediation\n but rather immediacy and simultaneity. Immediacy means that the necessary separation between the two events, the abyss of communication, is negated. Immediacies, like instantaneous actions at a distance, presuppose the difference they are deemed to eradicate.","PeriodicalId":40280,"journal":{"name":"Empedocles-European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Empedocles-European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1386/ejpc_00028_1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article revisits the debate between Leibniz and Clarke to explore conceptual shifts in the use of the term medium. A basic tenet of physics since antiquity says that every act of communication ‐ that is, every transmission of a force from the place of its cause to that of its effect ‐ requires a medium to ensure its interaction. In the context of the Early Modern Period, media were regarded as mediating instances that enabled communication. If these instances were not immediately connected but rather spatially separated from one another ‐ as in the case of gravitation, magnetism or electricity ‐ then there had to be a medium to ensure both the transmission of the force and the causal connection. Although the mediation of the medium took place in an inexplicable way, it seemed to explain one process or another by its mere introduction. The epistemological foundations of communicability ‐ those with which Leibniz, Clarke and Newton were attempting to come to terms ‐ remain relevant to the descriptive language with which we depict our present and its technological condition. Without duration there is no mediation but rather immediacy and simultaneity. Immediacy means that the necessary separation between the two events, the abyss of communication, is negated. Immediacies, like instantaneous actions at a distance, presuppose the difference they are deemed to eradicate.
远距离调解行动:莱布尼茨,克拉克和牛顿关于力量的可沟通性
这篇文章重新审视了莱布尼茨和克拉克之间的争论,以探索“媒介”一词使用中的概念转变。自古以来物理学的一个基本原则是,每一次交流行为——也就是说,力从产生地到产生地的每一次传递——都需要一种媒介来确保其相互作用。在现代早期的背景下,媒体被视为促成沟通的中介实例。如果这些情况没有立即联系起来,而是在空间上相互分离——就像引力、磁力或电的情况一样——那么就必须有一种介质来确保力的传递和因果关系。尽管媒介的调解是以一种莫名其妙的方式发生的,但它似乎只是通过介绍来解释一个或另一个过程。可交流性的认识论基础——莱布尼茨、克拉克和牛顿试图达成的基础——仍然与我们描述我们的现状及其技术条件的描述性语言相关。没有持续时间就没有调解,只有即时性和同时性。即时性意味着两个事件之间的必要分离,即沟通的深渊,被否定了。即时性,就像远距离的即时行动一样,以它们被视为消除的差异为前提。
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
×
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