On Berkeley’s solution to the Barrovian case

Carlos Alberto Cardona; Juliana Gutiérrez

doi:10.5007/1808-1711.2020v24n2p363

Authors

Carlos Alberto Cardona Universidad del Rosario
Juliana Gutiérrez Universidad del Rosario https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5433-9080

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2020v24n2p363

Abstract

At the beginning of the 18th century, Berkeley believed an anomaly pointed out
by Isaac Barrow could be regarded as important evidence against the optical theories that
had been established and standardized thanks to the works of Kepler and Newton. In this
article, we want to show that Berkeley’s treatment of the Barrovian Case does not falsify
these theories. We will contend that the strategy used by Berkeley to resolve the anomaly by
alluding to a change of convention is a strategy that the classical theorist could use as well.
In other words, the classical theorist could also appeal to a change of convention to deal with
the problem.

Author Biographies

Carlos Alberto Cardona, Universidad del Rosario

Universidad del Rosario (Bogotá), COLOMBIA

Juliana Gutiérrez, Universidad del Rosario

Universidad del Rosario (Bogotá), COLOMBIA

References

Armstrong, D. M. (1960). Berkeley´s Theory of Vision. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.

Atherton, Margaret. (1990). Berkeley´s Revolution in Vision. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Barrow, Isaac. (1860/2013). The Mathematical Works of Isaac Barrow. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Berkeley, George. (1710/1975) (PCH). A Treatise concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge. Philosophical Works (pp. 71-153), Londres: Everyman.

Berkeley, George. (1709/1975a) (ENTV). An Essay Toward a new Theory of Vision. Philosophical Works (pp. 71-153), Londres: Everyman.

Berkeley, George. (1707-8/1975b) (Commentaries). Philosophical Commentaries. Philosophical Works (pp. 305-412), Londres: Everyman.

Berkeley, George. (1733/1975c) (TVV). The Theory of Vision Vindicated and Explained. Philosophical Works (pp. 277-304), Londres: Everyman.

Kepler, Johannes. (1604/2000). Optics: 1604/2000 to Witelo & Optical Part of Astronomy. Santa Fe: Green Lion Press. Trad. William H. Donahue.

Lennon, Thomas M. (2007). “The significance of the Barrovian Case”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 38, pp. 36-55.

Luce, A. A. (1934). Berkeley and Malebranche, A Study in the Origins of Berkeley´s Thought. Londres: Oxford University Press.

Molyneux, William. (1709). Dioptrica Nova. A Treatise of Dioptriks, in two parts. Londres: Benj.

Pitcher, George. (1977). Berkeley. Londres: Routledge.

Ronchi, Vasco. (1955/1991). Optics. The Science of Vision. New York: Dover Publications, INC. Trad. Edward Rosen.

Shapiro, Alan. (1990). The Optical Lectures and the foundations of the theory of optical imagery. M. Feingold (edit.), Before Newton, The life and times of Isaac Barrow (pp. 105-178). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Stack, George J. (1991). Berkeley´s Analysis of Perception. New York: Peter Lang.

Tipton, I. C. (1974). Berkeley, the Philosophy of Inmaterialism. Londres: Methuen & Co Ltd.

Turbayne, C. M. (1962). The Myth of Metaphor. New Haven: Yale University Press.