Dear All: Is the book reviewed here relevant to this discussion?
*A History of Balance, 1250–1375: The Emergence of a New Model of Equilibrium and Its Impact on Thought* by Joel Kaye http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/05/26/great-ignored-transformation/ Ben N. *Ben Novak <http://bennovak.net>* 5129 Taylor Drive, Ave Maria, FL 34142 Telephone: (814) 808-5702 *"All art is mortal, **not merely the individual artifacts, but the arts themselves.* *One day the last portrait of Rembrandt* *and the last bar of Mozart will have ceased to be—**though possibly a colored canvas and a sheet of notes may remain—**because the last eye and the last ear accessible to their message **will have gone." *Oswald Spengler On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Benjamin Udell <baud...@gmail.com> wrote: > Even in the days of the Century Dictionary (late 19th to early 20th > Century), "empiric" and "empirical" had rather negative connotations. See > the definitions of "empiric," "empirical," and related terms that I > compiled at a website some years ago: > > http://peircematters.blogspot.com/#empir > > So empiricists in the modern sense would not have been fond of calling > themselves "empiricists" way back when. > > Best, Ben > > On 2/11/2017 2:06 PM, John Collier wrote: > > The reference is to the method, not the word. There is an historical > continuity between the Medieval empiricists like Roger Bacon, and Galen’s > followers (he died about 299 AD (who go back to Arabic predecessors, > perhaps influenced by Galen – medical usage, of course, but he seemed to > extend it in his views of the natural world) and the later ones who came > to called The British Empiricists, though not by that name at that time. On > source puts the general use of the modern accepted sense at 1796, well > after the British Empiricists. > > Typical definition: > > empiricist > ɛmˈpɪrɪsɪst/ > PHILOSOPHY > noun > 1. > a person who supports the theory that all knowledge is based on experience > derived from the senses. > "most scientists are empiricists by nature" > adjective > 1. > relating to or characteristic of the theory that all knowledge is based on > experience derived from the senses. > "his radically empiricist view of science as a direct engagement with the > world" > > The term in its present form originated in 1660-70; some say about 1700. > If you think that words determine thoughts, than there was no empiricism > except in medicine before these dates. > > Aristotle had some things I common with empiricists, but his requirement > for a rationalist/ essentialist middle term undermined that because it > required the active nour. The Medieval ones gave that up. But so did many > of the stoics, who were therefore empiricists. > > The term goes back to the Greeks, not that I think that some magic > connects terms to ideas: > > Etymology > The English term empirical derives from the Greek word ἐμπειρία, empeiria, > which is cognate with and translates to the Latin experientia, from which > are derived the word experience and the related experiment. The term was > used by the Empiric school of ancient Greek medical practitioners, who > rejected the three doctrines of the Dogmatic school, preferring to rely on > the observation of "phenomena".[5] > > NB the restriction to medicine here, similar to the early restriction of > semiotics to medicine. > > Peirce relevance: Peirce is usually included among those who tried to > combine elements of empiricism and rationalism, though for my money he > doesn’t fit either camp very well > > In any case, the recent attempts on this list to try to tie empiricism to > the use of the word are pretty poor examples of scholarship. > > John Collier > Emeritus Professor and Senior Research Associate Philosophy, University of > KwaZulu-Natal http://web.ncf.ca/collier > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: kirst...@saunalahti.fi [mailto:kirst...@saunalahti.fi > <kirst...@saunalahti.fi>] > > Sent: Saturday, 11 February 2017 5:58 PM > > To: Jerry LR Chandler <jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com> > <jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com> > > Cc: Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> <tabor...@primus.ca>; John > Collier > > <colli...@ukzn.ac.za> <colli...@ukzn.ac.za>; Peirce-L > <PEIRCE-L@list.iupui.edu> <PEIRCE-L@list.iupui.edu> > > Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - > > > > ----------------------------- > PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON > PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to > peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L > but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the > BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm > . > > > > > >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
