Bonn 2010 – scientific programme

Parts | Days | Selection | Search | Downloads | Help

AGPhil: Arbeitsgruppe Philosophie der Physik

AGPhil 6: History and Philosophy of Physics

AGPhil 6.4: Talk

Thursday, March 18, 2010, 15:45–16:15, JUR G

Kant on Hume’s analysis of causality and Euler’s notion of impenetrability — •Dieter Suisky — Institut für Physik, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, e-mail: dsuisky@physik.hu-berlin.de

In developing his critical approach, Kant referred in essential issues, the impenetrability of bodies and the causality in nature, to Euler and Hume, respectively. Kant appreciated the contributions of both scholars to the progress in science, but accentuated shortcomings in the foundation of Hume’s critique and Euler’s mechanics resulting from the underestimation and the overemphasized use of mathematics, respectively. According to Kant, Hume separated mathematics from the critique of causality (schnitt in unbedachtsamer Weise die reine Mathematik davon ab) whereas Euler, making use of a mathematical instead of a physical concept of impenetrability, introduced an occult quality.
It will be demonstrated that Kant did not completely analyze how Euler’s notion of impenetrability follows from the distinction between internal and external principles in mechanics. These principles are correlated with the preservation and the change of the states of bodies, respectively. In contrast to Euler, who rejected all kinds of inherent forces, Kant confined the procedure to the force of inertia and paved the way for the introduction of other forces residing in the bodies. In Euler’s mechanics, the forces are not innate or inherent properties of the bodies, but are generated by the interacting bodies whereas in Kant’s theory [Metaphysische Anfangsgründe] the attractive and repulsive forces remain to be inherent forces by construction.