Copernicus and the Hypothetico-Deductive Method of Correspondence Thinking
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/ths.1996.002Keywords
Copernicus, Hypothetico-Deductive Method, correspondenceAbstract
This article is a development of my earlier papers entitled “Copernicus’ corres-pondence thinking” and “Copernicus’ astronomical works — A remarkable case of applying the methodological idea of correspondence” which were delivered at the XIXth International Congress of History of Science (22-29.08.1993, Zaragoza, Spain) and 10th International Congress of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science (19-25.08.1995 Florence, Italy). To avoid misunderstandings at the very beginning of this article, let us explain here, that the term the ‘correspondence thinking’ has for us a special, methodological character that is closely connected, among other things, with the process of framing by theorists the theories which are linked by the correspondence principle. Regarding the linguistic form, the term ‘correspondence thinking" is comprehended by us as equivalent to Feyerabend’s German term “Korrespondenzdenken” that denotes the sort of thinking of Bohr, Kramers and Heisenberg, which was centered on Bohr’s correspondence principle (see Feyerabend [1962a] p. 203, p. 254 fn. 2). However, the term the ‘correspondence thinking’ will be comprehended by us in the broader sense on which we will say more below.References
Nicolaus Copernicus, Commentariolus. The Letter Against Werner, English trans¬lation by E. Rosen in: Rosen [1971].
Nicolaus Copernicus, Complete works, vol. II, On the Revolutions, Edited by Jerzy Dobrzycki, Translation and Commentary by Edward Rosen, Warsaw-Cracow, Polish Scientific Publishers 1978.
Nicolaus Copernicus, Complete Works, vol. Ill, Minor Works, Edited by Paweł Czartoryski, Translation and Commentary Edward Rosen with the assistance of Erna Hilfstein, Warsaw-Cracow, Polish Scientific Publishers 1978; Mikołaj Kopernik, O obrotach sfer niebieskich. Księga pierwsza. Ustalenie tekstu łacińskiego R. Gansiniec, przekład M. Brożek, komentarz A. Birkenmajer, redaktor A. Birkenmajer, Warszawa, PWN 1953.
Mikołaj Kopernik, O obrotach sfer niebieskich. Przekład M.Brożek (ks.I). S. Oś¬więcimski (ks. II-VI); Komentarz A. Birkenmajer, J. Dobrzycki, Redaktor J. Dobrzycki, Warszawa-Kraków, PWN 1975.
Georg Joachim Rheticus, Narrratioprima in Rosen, [1971],
Birkenmajer, A. [1925]: “Nominalisten Akademie zu Bologna (1494-1498)”, Phil- osopisches Jahrbuch, XXXVIII, p. 336-344.
Birkenmajer, A. [1936]: “Jak tworzył Kopernik”, Nauka Polska XXI, 1936, p. 75-98.
Birkenmajer, A. [1953] “Mikołaj Kopernik”, Wszechświat, 1953, p. 1-11. Birkenmajer, A. [1963]: “Kopernik jako filozof’, Studia i Materiały z Dziejów
Nauki Polskiej, ser. C. z. 7, p. 31-61.
Birkenmajer, L. A. [1900]: Mikołaj Kopernik, T. I, Kraków, Akademia Umiejętnoś¬ci, 1900.
Birkenmajer, L. A. [1901a]: “Marco Bonaventano, Kopernik, Wapowski, a najstar¬sza karta geograficzna Polski”, Rozprawy Wydz. Mat. - Przyr. AU, s. III, t. 1, dział A, Krakow, p. 134-222.
Birkenmajer, L. A. [1901b]: “Marco Bonaventano, Kopernik, Wapowski und die lterte geographische Kartę von Polen”, Bulletin international de 1’academie des sciences de Cracovie, classe des sciences math, et naturelles, p. 63—67.
Birkenmajer, L. A. [1923]: Mikołaj Kopernik jako uczony, twórca i obywatel, Kraków, Polska Akademia Umiejętności.
Birkenmajer, L. A. [1924]: Stromata Copernicana. Studia, poszukiwania i mate¬riały biograficzne, Kraków, Polska Akademia Umiejętności.
Blumenberg, H. [1975]: Die Genesis der kopernikanischen Welt, Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp Verlag; Engl, transl. by R. Wallace: The genesis of the Copernican World, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England, The MIT Press, 1987.
Bono, M. di [1995]: “Copernicus, Amico, Fracastoro and Tu’s Device: Observations on the Use and Transmission of a Model”, Journal for the History of Astronomy, xxvi, p. 133—154.
Butterfield, T. [1949]: The origins of modern sciences, 1300-1800, London, G. Bell and Sons Ltd; A revised edition (wihout major changes) [1957].
Chalmers, A. [1981]: “Planetary Distances in the Copernican Theory”, Brit. J. Phil. Sci., 32, p. 374-375.
Chalmers, A. [1983]: “Planetary Distances and Copernican Theory: A reply”, Brit. J. Phil. Sci., 34, p. 372-374.
Cohen, I. B. [1985]: Revolution in Science, The Belknap Press of Harward University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England.
Coyne, G. V., Hoskin, M. A. and Pedersen, O. (eds.) [1983]: Gregorian Reform of the Calendar. Proceedings of the Vatican Conference to Commemorate its 400th Anniversary 1582—1982, Citt del Vaticano, Pontificia Academia Scien- tiarum, Specola Vaticana.
Crombie, A. C. [1952]: Augustine to Galileo, vol. I—II, London, William Heine- mann LTD.
Crombie, A. C. [1994]: The Styles of Scientific Thinking in the European Tradition vol. I—III, London, Duckworth.
Curd, M. V. [1982]: “The rationality of the Copernican Revoluion”, PSA 1982, volume X, p. 3-13.
Curd, M. V. [1983]: “The superiority of the Copernican system: A reply to Chalmers”, Brit. J. Phil. Sci., 34, p. 367-369.
Czartoryski, P. [1978]: “The Library of Copernicus”, Studia Copernicana, XVI, p. 355-396.
Dobrzycki, J. [1953]: “Kształtowanie się założeń systemu kopernikowskiego”, Przegląd Zachodni, 9 ,111, p. 571-587.
Dobrzycki, J. [1965]: “The theory of precession in medieval astronomy” (in Polish), Studia i Materiały z Dziejów Nauki Polskiej, Ser. C, z. 11, p. 3^17.
Dobrzycki, J. [1975]: “Mikołaj Kopernik” in E. Rybka (ed.) [1975] p. 127-156. Dreyer, J. L. E. [1906]: History of the Planetary systems from Thales to Kepler, Cambridge. (Reprinted as A History of Astronomy from Thales to Kepler, New York, 1953)
Duhem, P. [1908]: ZQZEIN TA AINOMENA, Paris, A. Hermann et Fils; English translation by E. Dolan and Ch. Maschler [1969], The University of Chicago Press, Chicago London; Midway reprint edition [1985].
Duhem, P. [1913-1959]: Le System Du Monde, vol. 1-10, Hermann, Paris.
Duhem, P. [1954]: The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory, transl. by P.
P. Wiener, Princeton, Princton University Press; Translated from the second edition La Theorie Physique: Son Object, Sa Structure ([1914], Marcel River & Cie., Paris).
Felber, H. J. [1973]: “The Influence of Copernicus on the Gregorian Calendar Reform”, Studia Copernicana, XIII, p. 185—188.
Gingerich, O. [1973]: “The Role of Erasmus Reinhold and the Prutenic Tables in the Dissemination of Copernican Theory”, Studia Copernicana, VI, p. 43-62.
Gingerich, O. (ed.) [1975]: The nature of scientific discovery, Washington, Smith¬sonian Institution.
Gingerich, O., Westman, R. S. [1988]: “The Wittich Connection: conflict and Priority in late Sixteenth-Century Cosmology”, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, Volume 78, Part 7.
Goddu, A. [1990] “The Realism that Duhem rejected in Copernicus”, Synthese 83, p.301-315.
Goldstein, B. R. [1967]: “The Arabic Version of Ptolemy’s Planetary Hypotheses”, Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc. 57, part 4.
Goldstein, B. R. [1994]: “Historical perspectives on Copernicus’s account of precession”, Journal for the History of Astronomy, XXV, p. 189-197.
Grant, E. [1962a]: “Hypotheses in Late Medieval and Early Modern Science”, Deadalus, 91, 1962, p. 599—616.
Grant, E. [1962b], “Late Medieval Thought, Copernicus, and the Scientific Revolution”, Journal of the History of Ideas, 23, No 2, p. 197—220.
Hall, A .R. [1954]: The Scientific revolution 1500-1800: The formulation of the modern scientific attitude, New York, Longmans, Green and Company; Beacon Paperback edition, Boston, Beacon Press, 1956.
Hanson, N. R. [1964]: “Contra-Equivalence A Defense of the Originality of Copernicus”, ISIS, Vol. 55, 3, No. 181, p. 308-325.
Hanson, N. R. [1973]: Constelation and Conjectures, Dordrecht/Boston, D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Hartner, W. [1964]: fiMedieval Views on Cosmic Dimensions and Ptolemy’s Kitab al-Manshurat”, in Melanges Alexnadre Koyre, 2 vols. 1, p.254—282. Paris, Hermann.
Helden, A. van [1985]: Measuring The Universe. Cosmic Dimension from Aristar¬chus to Halley, Chicago & London, The University Chicago Press, 1985, p. 15-39.
Hoyle, F. [1973]: Nicolaus Copernicus. An Essay on His Life and Work, London, Heinemann.
Hutchison, K. [1983]: “Plnetary distances a test for the Copernican theory”, Brit. J. Phil. Sci., 34, p. 369-371.
Infeld, L. [1955] “Od Kopernika do Einsteina”, Kosmos Seria B 1955, R I, z. 3, p.209-226.
Kesten, H. [1945]: Copernicus and his World, New York, Roy Publishers.
Koestler, A. [1959]: The sleepwalkers, New York, The Macmillan Company.
Koyre, A. [1948] “Les etapes de la cosmologie scientifique”, Revue de Synthese, 70 (1948), 30; reprinted in R. Taton (ed.), Etudess d’histoire de la pensee scienti¬fique (Paris, 1966, 1973, 1985).
Koyre, A. [1957]: From the Closed World to the Infinite Universe, Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins Press.
Koyre, A. [1961]: La revolution astronomique, Copernic-Kepler-Boreli, Paris, Hermann; Engl, transl. [1973] by Hermann, Paris.
Kuhn, T. S. [1957]: The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western Thought, Cambridge, Mass, Harvard University Press.
Kurdziałek, M., Rebeta, J., Swieżawski, S. (eds.) [1973]: Mikołaj Kopernik. Studia i Materiały Sesji Kopernikanskiej w KUL 18-19 II 1972 r. Lublin, Towarzyst¬wo Naukowe Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego.
Lakatos, L, Zahar, E. [1975]: “Why did Copernicus’ Programme Supersede Ptolemy’s?” in R. Westman (ed.): The Copernican Achievemnt. Berkeley, California, California University Press, p. 354—383.
Margolis, H. [1993]: Paradigms and Barriers. How habits of Mind Govern Scientific Beliefs, Chicago and Lodon, The University of Chicago Press.
Markowski, M. [1971]: Burydanizm w Polsce w okresie przedkopernikańskim, Studia Copernicana, II.
Markowski, M. [1975]: “Kształtowanie się krakowskiej szkoły astronomicznej”, “Powstanie pełnej szkoły astronomicznej w Krakowie”, “Szczyt rozkwitu i międzynarodowego promieniowania krakowskiej szkoły astronomicznej”, in Rybka, E. [1975] T. I, p. 57-126.
Mercier, R. P. [1976], [1977]: “Studies in the Medieval Conception of Precession”, Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Sciances, 26 (1976) p. 197—220, and 27 (1977)p. 33-71.
Krajewski, W. [1975], “Copernicus and Galileo versus Aristotle - a new scientfic method against dogmatism and crude empiricism”, Studia Copernicana, XIV, p.201-205.
Moesgaard, K. P. [1968]: “The 1717 Egyptian years and the Copernicus’ theory of precession”, Centaurus, vol. 13, nr 2, p. 120—138.
Moesgaard, K. P. [1972]: “Copernican Influence on Tycho Brahe”, Studia Coperni¬cana, N, p. 31—55.
Neugebauer, O. [1957]: The Exact Sciences in Antiquity, Providence, Rhode Island, Brown University Press (Second edition).
Neugebauer, O. [1968]: “On the Planetary Theories of Copernicus”, Vistas in Astronomy, 10, p. 89—103.
O’Connell, D. J. K [1973]: “Copernicus and Calendar Reform”, Studia Copernica¬na, XIII p. 189-202.
Pedersen, O. [1978]: The Decline And Fall Of The Theorica Planetarum. Renaissance Astronomy and the Art of Printing”, Studia Copernicana, XVI, p. 157-185.
Petroni, A. M., Scolamiero, L. [1986]: “On the determination of planetary distances in the Copernican system”, Brit. J. Phil. Sci., 37, p. 335-340.
Price, D. J. [1957]: “Contra-Copemicus”, in Marshall Claget (ed.), Critical Problems in the History of Science, Proceedings of the Institute for the history of Science at the University of Wisconsin, September 1-11, 1957 (Madison, University of Wisconsin Press, 1959) p. 197-218.
Przypkowski, T. [1975]: “Udział polskich astronomów w reformie kalendarza oraz spór o kalendarz gregoriański”, in Rybka [1975], T. I, p. 215-228.
Rosen, E. [1971]: Three Copernican treaties, New York, Octagon Books, 1939, 1959, 1971.
Rosińska, G. [1973]: “Mikołaj Kopernik i tradycje krakowskiej szkoły astrono¬micznej. Astronomia obserwacyjno-matematyczna w Krakowie w XV w. Jej wpływ na kształtowanie się postawy filozoficznej astronomów”, in: Kurdziałek ... (eds.) [1973], p. 33-56.
Rosińska, G. [1974]: Instrumenty astronomiczne na Uniwersytecie Krakowskim w XV wieku, Studia Copernicana, XI.
Rosińska, G. [1984]: Scientific Writings and astronomical tables in Cracow, a census of manuscripts sources (XIVth-XVIth centuries), Studia Copernicana, XXII.
Russell, J. L. [1972]: “The Copernican system in Great Britain”, Studia Coperni¬cana, V, p. 189—239.
Rybka, E. [1975]: Historia astronomii w Polsce, T. I, Ossolineum.
Sabra, A. I. [1978] “An Eleventh-Century Refutation of Ptolemy’s Planetary Theory”, Studia Copernicana, XVI, p. 117—131.
Swerdlow, N. M. [1972]: “Aristotelian planetary theory in the Renaissance: Giovanni Battista Amico’s homocentric spheres”, Journal for the History of Astronomy, iii, p. 36-48.
Swerdlow, N. M. [1973]: “The Derivation and First Draft of Copernicus’s Plane¬tary Theory. A translation of he Commentariolus wih Commentary”, Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc., 117, p. 423-512.
Swerdlow, N. M. [1980]: “Long-period Motions of the Earth in De revolutionibus”, Centaurus, 1980, vol. 24, p. 212-245.
Swerdlow, N. M. and Neugebauer, O. [1984]: Mathematical astronomy in Coper¬nicus’s De revolutionibus (Studies in the history of mathematics and physical sciences; 10), Springer-Verlag New York Inc,. 1984.
Swerdlow, N. M. [1990]: “Regiomontanus on the critical problems of astronomy”, in Nature, experiment, and the sciences, ed. T. H. Levere and W. R. Shea (Dordrecht, 1990), p. 165-95.
Ujemow, A. [1953]: “System heliocentryczny Kopernika a teoria względności”, Myśl filozoficzna, 1953, 1 (7), p. 144—175.
Vasoli, C. [1975]: “Copemic et ses etudes italiennes”, Studia Copernicana, XIV, p.161-174.
Wasiutyński, J. [1938]: Kopernik. Twórca nowego nieba, Wydawnictwo J. Prze¬worskiego, Warszawa.
Werle, J. [1974]: “Co fizyka zawdzięcza Kopernikowi, a Kopernik fizyce?” (“What is Physics Owing to Copernicus, and Copernicus to Physics?”), Postępy Fizyki, T. 25, z. 4,1974, p. 311-325.
Wesolowskij, I. N., Belyj, J. A., [1974]: Huxojiojiafi KonepmiK, IfegaTejiBCTBo Hayxa, Mocraa.
Westman, R. S. (ed.) [1975]: The Copemican Achievement, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, University of California Press.
Selected Methodological Bibliography
Bunge, M. [1970]: “Problems Concerning Intertheory Relations”, in P. Weingart- ner and G. Zecha (eds.): Inductions, Physics, Etics. Dordrecht, Reidel, p. 285- 325.
Fadner, W. L. [1985]: “Theoretical Support for the Generalized Correspondence Principle”, American Journal of Physics, 53, p. 829—38.
Feyerabend, P. K. [1962a]: “Problems of Microphysics”, in Colodny, R. C. (ed.) Frontiers of Science and Philosophy, vol 1, University of Pitsburgh Series in the Philosophy of Science 1962, p. 189-283.
Feyerabend, P. K. [1962b]: “Explanation, Reduction and Empiricism”, in Feigl H., Maxwell G. (eds.): Minesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. Ill, Minneapolis; University of Minnesota Press.
Feyerabend, P. K. [1963]: “How to be a Good Empiricist - A Plea for Tolerance in Matters Epistemological”, in Baumrin B. (ed.): Philosophy of Science. The Delaware Seminar, vol. 2, Interscience Publishers a division of John Wiley and Sons, New York, London, Sydney, University of Delaware Press.
Feyerabend, P. K. [1964]: “Realism and Instrumentalism: Comments on the Logic of Factual Support” in Bunge M. (ed.): The Critical Approach to Science and Philosophy. In Honour of Karl R. Popper, Free Press of Glencoe, a division of the Macmillan Company.
Feyerabend, P. K. [1969]: “Science without Experience”, The Journal of Philos¬ophy, vol. LXVI, No. 22,1969.
Feyerabend, P. K. [1975]: Against Method, London, NLB.
Frank, F. [1941]: Between Physics and Philosophy.
French S., Kamminga H. (eds.) [1994]: Correspondence, Invariance and Heuris¬tics. Essays in Honour of Heinz Post. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 148, Dordrecht - Boston - London; Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hanson, N. R. [1965]: Patterns of Discovery. An Inquiry into the Conceptual Foundations of Science, Cambridge, Cambridge Unversity Press.
Hanson N. R. [1972]: Observation and Explanation. A Guide to Philosophy of Science, London, Geogre Allen & Unwin LTD.
Heisenberg, W. [1935, 1936, 1942, 1949, 1959]: Wandlungen der Grundlagen der exakten Naturwisenschaft, (edition 1935-1942) Leipzig, (edition 1949, 59) Stturgard, Verlag.
Heisenberg, W. [1969]: Der Teil und das Ganze. Gesprache im Umkreis der Atomphysik, Munchen, R. Piper & Co. Verlag. English translation by A. J. Po- merans under the title: Physics and Beyond. Encounters and Conversations, New York, Evanston and London [1971], Herper and Row, Publishers.
Heisenberg, W. [1971]: Schriftte fiber Grenzen, Munchen, R. Pipper & Co. Verlag. Heller, M. [1970]: Wobec wszechświata, Kraków, ZNAK.
Heller, M. [1976]: Początek świata, Kraków, ZNAK.
Heller, M. [1993]: Fizyka ruchu i czasoprzestrzeni, Warszawa, PWN.
Heller, M., Życiński, J. [1986]: WszechTwiat i Filozofia. Szkice z filozofii i historii nauki, Kraków, Polskie Towarzystwo Teologiczne.
Heller, M., Michalik, A., Życiński, J. (eds.) [1987]: Filozofować w kontekście nauki, Kraków, Polskie Towarzystwo Teologiczne.
Heller, M., Życiński, J., Michalik, A. (eds.) [1990]: Matematyczność Przyrody, Kraków, Papieska Akademia Teologiczna.
Jodkowski, K. [1980]: “O dwu rodzajach niewspółmierności interteoretycznej w ujęciu Paula K. Feyerabenda”, Studia Filozoficzne, nr 7 (176), p. 79-91.
Jodkowski, K. [1984]: “Płaszczyzny niewspółmierności w ujęciu T. S. Kuhna i P. K. Feyerabenda. Zmienność obserwacyjna”, Studia Filozoficzne, nr 5 (222), p. 119-134;
Kmita, J. [1980]: Z problemów epistemologii historycznej, Warszawa, PWN. Krajewski, W., Mejbaum W., Such J. (eds.) [1974]: The correspondence principle in physics and the development of science (in Polish), Warszawa, PWN.
Krajewski, W. [1977]: Correspondence Principle and Growth of Science, Dor¬drecht, Boston, Reidel.
Krajewski, W., Pietruska-Madej E., Żytkow J. M. (eds.) [1978]: Relations Between Theories in the Course of the Growth of Science (in Polish), Wroclaw, Warszawa, Kraków, Gdańsk, Ossolineum.
Kuhn, T. S. [1962]: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago, The Univer¬sity of Chicago Press.
Kuhn, T. S. [1977]: The Essential Tension, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.
Lakatos, I. [1970]: “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes”, in Lakatos I., Musgrave A. (eds.): Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge 1970, p. 91-197.
Lakatos, I. [1971]: History of Science and its rational reconstructions, in Philoso-phical Papers, vol. I, ed by J. Worral and G. Curie, Cambridge UP, London.
Laudan, L. [1990], “De-Mystifying Underdetermination”, in Savage C. W. (ed.): Scientific Theories, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. XIV, p. 276-297. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.
Łodyński, A. [1980]: “Kuhn, Feyerabend i problem niewspółmierności teorii naukowych”, Studia Filozoficzne, nr 5 (174), p. 19-40.
McMullin, E. [1984]: “The Goals of Natural Science” in I. Hronszky, M.F eher and B. Dajka (eds.) Scientific Knowledge Socialized, Dordrecht/Boston/London, Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 27-58.
Peirce, Ch. S. [1957]: Essays In The Philosophy of Science, U.S.A., The Liberal Arts Press, Inc.
Pietruska-Madej, E. [1990]: Odkrycie naukowe. Kontrowersje Filozoficzne, War¬szawa, PWN.
Poincare, H. [1906]: La Valeur de la Science, Paris, Flammarion. English translation, reprint, Value of Science, Dover [1958].
Post, H. R. [1971]: “Correspondence, Invariance and Heuristics: in Price of Conservative Induction”, Studies in History of Science, 2, p. 213-255.
Radder, H. [1991]: “Heuristics and the Generalized Correspondence Principle”, Brit. J. Phil. Sci., 42, p. 195-226.
Reinchenbach, H. [1942]: From Copernicus to Einstein, New York.
Strauss, M. [1970]: “Intertheory Relations”, in P. Weingartner and G. Zecha (eds.): Inductions, Physics, Etics, Dordrecht, Reidel, p. 221-284.
Strauss, M. [1972]: Modern Physics and its Philosophy, Dordrecht, Reidel. Szumilewicz, I. [1977]: “Incommensurability and the Rationality of the Develop¬ment of Science, Brit. J. Phil. Sci., 28, p. 345-350.
Szumilewicz, I. [1980]: “Spór o niewspólmierność teorii naukowych i jego histo¬ryczny rodowód”, Studia Filozoficzne, nr 1 (170), p. 22—33.
Zahar, E. [1982]: “The Popper-Lakatos Controversy”, Fundamenta Scientiae, vol. 3, no 1, p. 21-54.
Zahar, E. [1983]: “Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Invention?”, Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 34, p. 243-261.
Życiński J. [1993]: Granice racjonalności. Eseje z filozofii nauki, Warszawa, PWN.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 679
Number of citations: 0
