A Galilean Fallacy of Equivocation

Document Type

Book Section

Publication Date

8-29-2021

Publication Title

Science, Method, and Argument in Galileo

Publisher

Springer, Cham

Publisher Location

Cham, Switzerland

Volume

40

First page number:

21

Last page number:

27

Abstract

In an attempt to illustrate and justify the relevance and usefulness of logic in the study of the history of science, Galileo’s refutation of space-proportionality as found in Two New Sciences is analyzed in the light of some recent historical reinterpretations and with an awareness and appreciation of methodological distinctions. Having distinguished between the structure and the validity of Galileo’s argument, the former is shown to be uniquely determined by the recent interpretations, thus reconciling some of their differences. It is then suggested that the argument must be evaluated as logically faulty, either in the sense of being a fallacy of equivocation, or in the sense of being a proof of ignotum per aeque ignotum; and some evidence is given supporting the former evaluation. These results are seen as valuable from the logician’s point of view, independently of the historian’s possible judgments of merit or demerit for Galileo.

Controlled Subject

Galilei, Galileo, 1564-1642; Fallacies (Logic); Logic; Reasoning

Disciplines

Epistemology | Philosophy | Philosophy of Science

Language

English

Rights

IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/

UNLV article access

Share

COinS