03398nam a22004695i 4500001001800000003000900018005001700027007001500044008004100059020003700100024003500137050001700172072001600189072002300205072001500228100008600243245014500329250001800474264006900492300003300561336002600594337002600620338003600646347002400682490011800706505028600824520130801110650002902418650003202447650003102479650003402510710003402544773002602578776003602604776003602640776003602676830012502712856004602837912001402883912001402897999001702911978-3-031-60526-0DE-He21320251030112324.0cr nn 008mamaa240621s2024    sz |    s    |||| 0|eng d  a97830316052609978-3-031-60526-07 a10.1007/978-3-031-60526-02doi 4aQ124.6-127.2 7aPDX2bicssc 7aSCI0340002bisacsh 7aPDX2thema1 aŠpelda, Daniel.eauthor.4aut4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut97906914aThe Origins of the Idea of Scientific Progressh[electronic resource] :bBernard de Fontenelle and His Contemporaries /cby Daniel Špelda.  a1st ed. 2024. 1aCham :bSpringer Nature Switzerland :bImprint: Springer,c2024.  aIX, 224 p.bonline resource.  atextbtxt2rdacontent  acomputerbc2rdamedia  aonline resourcebcr2rdacarrier  atext filebPDF2rda1 aInternational Archives of the History of Ideas Archives internationales d'histoire des idées,x2215-0307 ;v2500 aChapter 1. The Concept of Progress -- Chapter 2. Teleology and Contingency -- Chapter 3. The End of Contemplator Caeli -- Chapter 4. The Temporal Regime of Knowledge -- Chapter 5. Ars Longa, vita Brevis: The Collectivization of Knowledge -- Chapter 6. Progress of the Human Spirit.  aThis volume offers a new interpretation of the genesis of the idea of scientific progress in early modern science and philosophy. The interpretation argues that the idea of scientific progress was not a historical category, but an epistemological one. The main thesis of the book posits that the idea of scientific progress was a methodological means of dealing with the contingency of nature. To illustrate the novelty of the idea, the individual chapters compare several features of Renaissance natural philosophy with a new regime of knowledge that included time as an inevitable factor of empirical research. The temporal regime of knowledge is illustrated by the work of Bernard de Fontenelle and his colleagues at the Académie des sciences in Paris at the end of the 17th century. The new interpretation remedies a gap in recent scholarship where the idea of scientific progress has been overlooked even though the early modern natural philosophers themselves used it to describe the nature of their research. The book places both well-known texts and less-studied documents in a new light, thus contributing to the lively and rich debate on the origins and nature of early modern science and philosophy. It is of interest to scholars studying the history of early modern philosophy and science. 0aSciencexHistory.965232 0aSciencexPhilosophy.96330714aHistory of Science.96610124aPhilosophy of Science.9685602 aSpringerLink (Online service)0 tSpringer Nature eBook08iPrinted edition:z978303160525308iPrinted edition:z978303160527708iPrinted edition:z9783031605284 0aInternational Archives of the History of Ideas Archives internationales d'histoire des idées,x2215-0307 ;v25097907040uhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60526-0  aZDB-2-HTY  aZDB-2-SXH  c60896d60896