This is the penultimate pre-publication version of John A. Schuster, ‘Did Descartes Teach a ‘Philosophy of Science’ or Implement ‘Strategies of Natural Philosophical Explanation’?’ in Stephen Gaukroger and Catherine Wilson (Eds.) Descartes and Cartesianism: Essays in Honour of Desmond Clarke, OUP, 2017, pp.3-25. Page numbers in brackets indicate page numbers in the published version. This paper raises issues and challenges, which I leave to the reader, concerning the ways in which an historian might write the history of early modern natural philosophizing, compared to the manner in which a philosopher might do so. See also in the ‘Book Reviews’ Section my essay review of Clarke’s biography of Descartes.
Final pre-publication version of J.A. Schuster (2017) ‘Consuming and Appropriating Practical Mathematics and the Mixed Mathematical Fields, or Being “Influenced” by Them: The Case of the Young Descartes’ in Lesley Cormack, Stephen Walton and John Schuster (Eds.) Mathematical Practitioners and the Transformation of Natural Knowledge in Early Modern Europe, Dordrecht, Springer pp.37-65. An historiographical exercise and case study.
Penultimate pre-publication version of John A. Schuster and Judit Brody (2013) ‘Descartes and Sunspots: Matters of Fact and Systematising Strategies in the Principia Philosophiae’, Annals of Science 70 (1):1-45. (March 2013 selected as one of ‘70 key papers’ to celebrate the 77 years and 70 volumes of this journal.)
The final pre-publication version of the chapter, “Cartesian Physics” commissioned for the Oxford Handbook of the History of Physics, edited by Jed Buchwald and Robert Fox, OUP 2013, pp. 56-95
J.A. Schuster, ‘What was the relation of Baroque Culture to the Trajectory of Early Modern Natural Philosophy’, in O. Gal and R. Chen-Morris (eds.), Science in the Age of Baroque, (Archives internationales d’histoire des idées 208) (2013), pp.13-45.
This is the penultimate, pre-publication version, templated for ease of reading and printing. The entire volume was devoted to papers emerging from the Baroque Science Project which the editors co–ordinated with Australian Research Council Funding at the School of History & Philosophy of Science, University of Sydney.
Published in Synthese 185 (2012): 467-499, as part of a ‘Thematic Section’ on ‘Seeing the causes in Baroque Optics’. See also the unpublished but intended Introduction to that ‘Thematic Section’ on this site. Final pre-publication version. Page numbers in published text in brackets in this text.
In April 2012 Synthese published a ‘Thematic Section’ of three papers dealing with ‘seeing the causes in Baroque Optics’ a part of the Baroque Science Project conducted between 2006 and 2009 by Ofer Gal, Raz Chen-Morris and colleagues in the School of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Sydney These papers are: •Ofer Gal and Raz Chen-Morris, ‘Nature’s drawing: problems and resolutions in the mathematization of motion’, Synthese, 185 no.3 (2012): 429-466. •John A. Schuster, ‘Physico-mathematics and the search for causes in Descartes’ optics—1619–1637’ Synthese, 185 no. 3 (2012): 467-499. •Sven Dupré, ‘Kepler’s Optics without Hypotheses’, Synthese, 185 no.3 (2012): 501-525. The Thematic Section was supposed to be prefaced by an Introduction, linking the papers to each other and to the Baroque Optics research program. In the event it was not possible to provide the Introduction in the published volume of Synthese. However, John Schuster, elaborating an earlier draft by Ofer Gal, here introduces the papers in the Thematic Section. See also the relevant Schuster paper in this research section.
The penultimate pre-publication version of my paper, ‘Pierre Duhem and Alistair Crombie Revisited: Or, How to Recover the Formative Role of Medieval Catholic Natural Philosophizing in the Rise of Modern Science’ Connor Court Quarterly No.5/6 December 2012, pp.167-182 Printed pagination in brackets. The paper is an experiment in historiography. It explores what, if anything, can today be usefully retrieved from the Medieval-centric ‘continuist’ historiographies of the rise of Modern Science of Pierre Duhem and Alistair Crombie, by making use of my own preferred categories and approaches to the problem.