如何在教学一致性和经验反证据之间做出选择?丹尼尔·塞纳特《自然科学概论》的四个版本

IF 0.2 2区 哲学 Q3 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Christoph Lüthy
{"title":"如何在教学一致性和经验反证据之间做出选择?丹尼尔·塞纳特《自然科学概论》的四个版本","authors":"Christoph Lüthy","doi":"10.1163/15733823-20251359","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In the academic year 1599–1600, Daniel Sennert offered a course on natural philosophy at the University of Wittenberg. When it was finished, he bundled the set of 26 disputations that accompanied the course into a separate publication and entitled it <i>Epitome naturalis scientiæ</i>. Although he was professor of medicine from 1602 onwards, he continued to work on natural philosophy and published three further versions of his <i>Epitome</i>, now in the form of a textbook. This article offers a comparative analysis of all four versions, dated 1599/1600, 1618, 1624, and 1632/33 respectively. It documents that Sennert insisted on the importance of providing students with a coherent body of doctrine, which he felt had to be Aristotelian, but at the same time introduced new empirical material into his textbooks. While these additions worked well in the case of his natural historical inserts, they were problematic in the case of his turn to an atomistic theory of matter, and they involved a full contradiction in the case of cosmology. Sennert’s case illustrates a key problem for university pedagogues in the pre-Cartesian part of the seventeenth century – namely, that of maintaining a coherent curriculum in the face of mounting counterevidence against the traditional framework.</p>","PeriodicalId":49081,"journal":{"name":"Early Science and Medicine","volume":"349 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to Choose between Pedagogical Coherence and Empirical Counterevidence? The Four Versions of Daniel Sennert’s Epitome naturalis scientiæ\",\"authors\":\"Christoph Lüthy\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15733823-20251359\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In the academic year 1599–1600, Daniel Sennert offered a course on natural philosophy at the University of Wittenberg. When it was finished, he bundled the set of 26 disputations that accompanied the course into a separate publication and entitled it <i>Epitome naturalis scientiæ</i>. Although he was professor of medicine from 1602 onwards, he continued to work on natural philosophy and published three further versions of his <i>Epitome</i>, now in the form of a textbook. This article offers a comparative analysis of all four versions, dated 1599/1600, 1618, 1624, and 1632/33 respectively. It documents that Sennert insisted on the importance of providing students with a coherent body of doctrine, which he felt had to be Aristotelian, but at the same time introduced new empirical material into his textbooks. While these additions worked well in the case of his natural historical inserts, they were problematic in the case of his turn to an atomistic theory of matter, and they involved a full contradiction in the case of cosmology. Sennert’s case illustrates a key problem for university pedagogues in the pre-Cartesian part of the seventeenth century – namely, that of maintaining a coherent curriculum in the face of mounting counterevidence against the traditional framework.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Early Science and Medicine\",\"volume\":\"349 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Early Science and Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15733823-20251359\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Early Science and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15733823-20251359","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在1599-1600学年,丹尼尔·森纳特在维滕贝格大学开设了一门自然哲学课程。当这本书完成后,他将随课程而来的26篇论辩捆绑成一份单独的出版物,并将其命名为《自然科学概论》。虽然他从1602年起就担任医学教授,但他继续研究自然哲学,并出版了三个版本的《概论》,现在以教科书的形式出版。本文对所有四个版本进行了比较分析,分别为1599/1600年、1618年、1624年和1632/33年。它记录了塞纳特坚持为学生提供连贯的学说体系的重要性,他认为这些学说必须是亚里士多德的,但同时在他的教科书中引入了新的经验材料。虽然这些补充在他的自然史插入中工作得很好,但在他转向物质原子论的情况下,它们就有问题了,而且它们与宇宙学的情况完全矛盾。Sennert的案例说明了17世纪前笛卡尔时期大学教师面临的一个关键问题——即,面对越来越多的反对传统框架的反证,如何保持课程的连贯性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How to Choose between Pedagogical Coherence and Empirical Counterevidence? The Four Versions of Daniel Sennert’s Epitome naturalis scientiæ

In the academic year 1599–1600, Daniel Sennert offered a course on natural philosophy at the University of Wittenberg. When it was finished, he bundled the set of 26 disputations that accompanied the course into a separate publication and entitled it Epitome naturalis scientiæ. Although he was professor of medicine from 1602 onwards, he continued to work on natural philosophy and published three further versions of his Epitome, now in the form of a textbook. This article offers a comparative analysis of all four versions, dated 1599/1600, 1618, 1624, and 1632/33 respectively. It documents that Sennert insisted on the importance of providing students with a coherent body of doctrine, which he felt had to be Aristotelian, but at the same time introduced new empirical material into his textbooks. While these additions worked well in the case of his natural historical inserts, they were problematic in the case of his turn to an atomistic theory of matter, and they involved a full contradiction in the case of cosmology. Sennert’s case illustrates a key problem for university pedagogues in the pre-Cartesian part of the seventeenth century – namely, that of maintaining a coherent curriculum in the face of mounting counterevidence against the traditional framework.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Early Science and Medicine
Early Science and Medicine HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Early Science and Medicine (ESM) is a peer-reviewed international journal dedicated to the history of science, medicine and technology from the earliest times through to the end of the eighteenth century. The need to treat in a single journal all aspects of scientific activity and thought to the eighteenth century is due to two factors: to the continued importance of ancient sources throughout the Middle Ages and the early modern period, and to the comparably low degree of specialization and the high degree of disciplinary interdependence characterizing the period before the professionalization of science.
×
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