Galileo versus Aristotle on Free Falling Bodies

History of Philosophy & Logical Analysis 7 (1):81-89 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This essay attempts to demonstrate that it is doubtful if Galileo's famous thought experiment concerning falling bodies in his 'Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences' (Galileo 1954: 61-64) actually does succeed in proving that Aristotle was wrong in claiming that "bodies of different weight […] move […] with different speeds which stand to one another in the same ratio as their weights," (Galileo 1954: 61). (Part I); and further that it is likewise doubtful that that argument does or even can establish Galileo's own famous 'Law of Falling Bodies,' viz., that regardless of their weight all bodies fall with the same speed. (Part II)

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.30965/26664275-00701006

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,551

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Galileo vs Aristotle on free falling bodies.Markus Andreas Schrenk - 2004 - History of Philosophy & Logical Analysis 7 (1):1-11.
Galileo's Falling Bodies.Liz Stillwaggon Swan - 2011 - In Michael Bruce & Steven Barbone (eds.), Just the Arguments. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.: Wiley‐Blackwell. pp. 346–347.
Galileo and prior philosophy.David Atkinson & Jeanne Peijnenburg - 2004 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 35 (1):115-136.
The Function and Limit of Galileo’s Falling Bodies Thought Experiment.Rawad el Skaf - 2018 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 18 (1):37-58.
‘Spuntar lo scoglio più duro’: did Galileo ever think the most beautiful thought experiment in the history of science?Paolo Palmieri - 2005 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 36 (2):223-240.
Galileo's refutation of the speed-distance law of fall rehabilitated.John D. Norton & Bryan W. Roberts - 2010 - Centaurus 54 (2):148-164.
Rehabilitated.John D. Norton - unknown
Parts of Falling Objects: Galileo’s Thought Experiment in Mereological Setting.Rafał Gruszczyński - 2022 - Erkenntnis 87 (4):1583-1604.
Two Ways of Imagining Galileo's Experiment.Margot Strohminger - 2021 - In Amy Kind & Christopher Badura (eds.), Epistemic Uses of Imagination. New York, NY: Routledge. pp. 202-217.
Thought Experiment more geometric.Daria Drozdova - 2016 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 49 (3):43-47.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-05-21

Downloads
42 (#535,160)

6 months
14 (#234,785)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Markus Schrenk
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf

Citations of this work

The Role of Explanation in Understanding.Kareem Khalifa - 2013 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 64 (1):161-187.
Why Computer Simulation Cannot Be an End of Thought Experimentation.N. K. Shinod - 2021 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 52 (3):431-453.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Are Thought Experiments Just What You Thought?John D. Norton - 1996 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 26 (3):333 - 366.
Galileo and the indispensability of scientific thought experiment.Tamar Szabó Gendler - 1998 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (3):397-424.
Thought Experiments.Yiftach J. H. Fehige & James R. Brown - 2010 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 25 (1):135-142.
Dictionary of Philosophy.Simon Blackburn - 2005 - Oxford ;: Oxford University Press UK.

Add more references