Jean d'Alembert, 1717-83 by Ronald GrimsleyReview by: Thomas L. HankinsIsis, Vol. 56, No. 2 (Summer, 1965), pp. 242-243Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of The History of Science SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/227946 .

Accessed: 08/05/2014 21:11

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The University of Chicago Press and The History of Science Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to Isis.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 21:11:47 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BOOK REVIEWS - ISIS, 56 2-184 (1965) BOOK REVIEWS - ISIS, 56 2-184 (1965)

(" The Rise of Modern Europe "), such an addition would vastly improve this one.

I. BERNARD COHEN Harvard University

(" The Rise of Modern Europe "), such an addition would vastly improve this one.

I. BERNARD COHEN Harvard University

I SEVENTEENTH & EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES

Ronald Grimsley. Jean d'Alembert, 1717-83. 316 pp., front. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963. $6.10.

Although d'Alembert has long been recognized as one of the leading figures of the French Enlightenment, he has suffered many years of neglect by his- torians of this period. Before this pres- ent work, the last biography of d'Alem- bert was published in 1889, and very little has appeared during the inter- vening years. Therefore, a careful study of this important French philosopher is particularly welcome. Although Grims- ley's conclusions do not differ greatly from those of earlier biographers, his study of manuscripts, memoirs, and correspondences of this period makes his work valuable for determining more accurately d'Alembert's place in the Enlightenment.

The book begins with a description of d'Alembert's early years and his par- ticipation in the enterprise of the En- cyclopeddie. This is followed by an account of his activities in the cam- paign of the philosophes against the intolerance of the church and the Parlements. The author describes d'Alembert's successful attempt to con- trol the membership of the French Academy which he used as a pulpit for his "philosophical" discourses and eulogies, and continues with a very interesting chapter on the relations between d'Alembert and Voltaire. Al- though many of the philosophes agreed with Grimm that d'Alembert was " the visible chief of the church of which Vol- taire was the founder and sustainer," the patriarch and his lieutenant at Paris were sometimes at odds on how best to further the "philosophical" cause. From his mountain retreat at Ferney, Voltaire pressed for an open attack on

I SEVENTEENTH & EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES

Ronald Grimsley. Jean d'Alembert, 1717-83. 316 pp., front. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963. $6.10.

Although d'Alembert has long been recognized as one of the leading figures of the French Enlightenment, he has suffered many years of neglect by his- torians of this period. Before this pres- ent work, the last biography of d'Alem- bert was published in 1889, and very little has appeared during the inter- vening years. Therefore, a careful study of this important French philosopher is particularly welcome. Although Grims- ley's conclusions do not differ greatly from those of earlier biographers, his study of manuscripts, memoirs, and correspondences of this period makes his work valuable for determining more accurately d'Alembert's place in the Enlightenment.

The book begins with a description of d'Alembert's early years and his par- ticipation in the enterprise of the En- cyclopeddie. This is followed by an account of his activities in the cam- paign of the philosophes against the intolerance of the church and the Parlements. The author describes d'Alembert's successful attempt to con- trol the membership of the French Academy which he used as a pulpit for his "philosophical" discourses and eulogies, and continues with a very interesting chapter on the relations between d'Alembert and Voltaire. Al- though many of the philosophes agreed with Grimm that d'Alembert was " the visible chief of the church of which Vol- taire was the founder and sustainer," the patriarch and his lieutenant at Paris were sometimes at odds on how best to further the "philosophical" cause. From his mountain retreat at Ferney, Voltaire pressed for an open attack on

their adversaries, while d'Alembert, who was in the middle of the battle zone, constantly urged greater caution.

Grimsley also clarifies the relations between d'Alembert and Rousseau and shows that d'Alembert, rather than joining Voltaire in vilifying Rousseau, tried to defend him until the famous Hume-Rousseau quarrel finally forced d'Alembert to condemn Rousseau's be- havior. After describing d'Alembert's friendship and long correspondence with Frederick the Great, Grimsley closes this central portion of his book with a discussion of d'Alembert's atti- tudes toward religion and jurispru- dence, the two problems which were uppermost in the "philosophical" campaign for reform.

The picture of d'Alembert which emerges is that of a dedicated but occa- sionally timid philosopher and cam- paigner. In spite of his caution, how- ever, d'Alembert's widespread influence and his unswerving devotion to the "philosophical" cause made him a more important figure than has been generally recognized.

The last three chapters will probably be the most interesting ones for the historian of science for they deal with d'Alembert's theory of knowledge, his philosophy of science, and the histori- cal sources of his ideas. Science played an important role in all of his thought, and his statements about the structure and purpose of science are the most interesting and original parts of his philosophy. Grimsley has recognized the essential conflict in d'Alembert's philosophy between the epistemology of Locke, which he publicly professed, and the rationalist ideal of Descartes, which permeated all his writings. D'Alembert ran into difficulty trying to reconcile his belief that all knowledge is built on simple sensations to the world of mathematics, which appar- ently partakes of an intellectual realm beyond that of pure sensation. D'Alem- bert's debt to the Cartesians was prob- ably greater than Grimsley is willing to admit. Although Grimsley quotes d'Alembert's disparaging comments on Malebranche, he overlooks the fact that d'Alembert's rejection of forces was al-

their adversaries, while d'Alembert, who was in the middle of the battle zone, constantly urged greater caution.

Grimsley also clarifies the relations between d'Alembert and Rousseau and shows that d'Alembert, rather than joining Voltaire in vilifying Rousseau, tried to defend him until the famous Hume-Rousseau quarrel finally forced d'Alembert to condemn Rousseau's be- havior. After describing d'Alembert's friendship and long correspondence with Frederick the Great, Grimsley closes this central portion of his book with a discussion of d'Alembert's atti- tudes toward religion and jurispru- dence, the two problems which were uppermost in the "philosophical" campaign for reform.

The picture of d'Alembert which emerges is that of a dedicated but occa- sionally timid philosopher and cam- paigner. In spite of his caution, how- ever, d'Alembert's widespread influence and his unswerving devotion to the "philosophical" cause made him a more important figure than has been generally recognized.

The last three chapters will probably be the most interesting ones for the historian of science for they deal with d'Alembert's theory of knowledge, his philosophy of science, and the histori- cal sources of his ideas. Science played an important role in all of his thought, and his statements about the structure and purpose of science are the most interesting and original parts of his philosophy. Grimsley has recognized the essential conflict in d'Alembert's philosophy between the epistemology of Locke, which he publicly professed, and the rationalist ideal of Descartes, which permeated all his writings. D'Alembert ran into difficulty trying to reconcile his belief that all knowledge is built on simple sensations to the world of mathematics, which appar- ently partakes of an intellectual realm beyond that of pure sensation. D'Alem- bert's debt to the Cartesians was prob- ably greater than Grimsley is willing to admit. Although Grimsley quotes d'Alembert's disparaging comments on Malebranche, he overlooks the fact that d'Alembert's rejection of forces was al-

242 242

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 21:11:47 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BOOK REVIEWS - ISIS, 56-2-184 (1965) BOOK REVIEWS - ISIS, 56-2-184 (1965) BOOK REVIEWS - ISIS, 56-2-184 (1965)

most certainly inspired by Malebranche, and his laws of motion derived from the nature of matter and motion alone were an attempt to succeed where Descartes and Malebranche had failed.

Grimsley has thoroughly explored d'Alembert's contributions to the "philosophical" movement, but the reader may be disappointed that he has devoted so little space to d'Alembert's life as a scientist. There is no descrip- tion of his activities at the Academy of Sciences nor any discussion of his relations with other European scientists. It is perhaps unfair to charge Grimsley with neglect, since he explicitly states that his book is not directly concerned with d'Alembert's scientific activities, although, as Grimsley himself admits, d'Alembert's general philosophical thinking was dependent on attitudes of mind inspired by his mathematical training.

It is also in the discussion of d'Alem- bert's scientific accomplishments that Grimsley has been most subject to error. He claims, for instance, that d'Alembert, in his memoirs on the vibrating string, " made an important mathematical discovery - the theory of differential equations" (p. 5). This should read "partial differential equa- tions," although the statement is still not exact, since d'Alembert had been anticipated in this important field of mathematics by Euler in 1734. Like- wise the word statique is twice mis- translated as "statistics" rather than " statics " (pp. 258-259). Grimsley also states that d'Alembert "roundly con- demns" the question proposed by the Berlin Academy as to whether the laws of mechanics are of necessary or con- tingent truth, whereas in fact, d'Alem- bert claimed that the observed laws of nature are those that he has derived in a rigorous fashion and are therefore absolutely necessary. Except for these errors, the chapters on d'Alembert's theory of knowledge, his philosophy of science, and the historical sources of his ideas are valuable and will be of interest to the historian of science.

This is the best available biography of d'Alembert; it surpasses the older one by Joseph Bertrand in every respect

most certainly inspired by Malebranche, and his laws of motion derived from the nature of matter and motion alone were an attempt to succeed where Descartes and Malebranche had failed.

Grimsley has thoroughly explored d'Alembert's contributions to the "philosophical" movement, but the reader may be disappointed that he has devoted so little space to d'Alembert's life as a scientist. There is no descrip- tion of his activities at the Academy of Sciences nor any discussion of his relations with other European scientists. It is perhaps unfair to charge Grimsley with neglect, since he explicitly states that his book is not directly concerned with d'Alembert's scientific activities, although, as Grimsley himself admits, d'Alembert's general philosophical thinking was dependent on attitudes of mind inspired by his mathematical training.

It is also in the discussion of d'Alem- bert's scientific accomplishments that Grimsley has been most subject to error. He claims, for instance, that d'Alembert, in his memoirs on the vibrating string, " made an important mathematical discovery - the theory of differential equations" (p. 5). This should read "partial differential equa- tions," although the statement is still not exact, since d'Alembert had been anticipated in this important field of mathematics by Euler in 1734. Like- wise the word statique is twice mis- translated as "statistics" rather than " statics " (pp. 258-259). Grimsley also states that d'Alembert "roundly con- demns" the question proposed by the Berlin Academy as to whether the laws of mechanics are of necessary or con- tingent truth, whereas in fact, d'Alem- bert claimed that the observed laws of nature are those that he has derived in a rigorous fashion and are therefore absolutely necessary. Except for these errors, the chapters on d'Alembert's theory of knowledge, his philosophy of science, and the historical sources of his ideas are valuable and will be of interest to the historian of science.

This is the best available biography of d'Alembert; it surpasses the older one by Joseph Bertrand in every respect

most certainly inspired by Malebranche, and his laws of motion derived from the nature of matter and motion alone were an attempt to succeed where Descartes and Malebranche had failed.

Grimsley has thoroughly explored d'Alembert's contributions to the "philosophical" movement, but the reader may be disappointed that he has devoted so little space to d'Alembert's life as a scientist. There is no descrip- tion of his activities at the Academy of Sciences nor any discussion of his relations with other European scientists. It is perhaps unfair to charge Grimsley with neglect, since he explicitly states that his book is not directly concerned with d'Alembert's scientific activities, although, as Grimsley himself admits, d'Alembert's general philosophical thinking was dependent on attitudes of mind inspired by his mathematical training.

It is also in the discussion of d'Alem- bert's scientific accomplishments that Grimsley has been most subject to error. He claims, for instance, that d'Alembert, in his memoirs on the vibrating string, " made an important mathematical discovery - the theory of differential equations" (p. 5). This should read "partial differential equa- tions," although the statement is still not exact, since d'Alembert had been anticipated in this important field of mathematics by Euler in 1734. Like- wise the word statique is twice mis- translated as "statistics" rather than " statics " (pp. 258-259). Grimsley also states that d'Alembert "roundly con- demns" the question proposed by the Berlin Academy as to whether the laws of mechanics are of necessary or con- tingent truth, whereas in fact, d'Alem- bert claimed that the observed laws of nature are those that he has derived in a rigorous fashion and are therefore absolutely necessary. Except for these errors, the chapters on d'Alembert's theory of knowledge, his philosophy of science, and the historical sources of his ideas are valuable and will be of interest to the historian of science.

This is the best available biography of d'Alembert; it surpasses the older one by Joseph Bertrand in every respect

and will hopefully arouse new interest in this famous French mathematician.

THOMAS L. HANKINS

University of Washington

G. A. Lindeboom (Editor). Iconographia Boerhaavii (Volume 4 of Analecta Boer- haaviana). ix + 31 pp., 40 pits. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1963.

Herman Boerhaave taught medicine at the University of Leiden for thirty- seven years (1701-1738) and played an important role in the development of medical education. He recognized the place of chemistry in medicine without being carried away by the overenthusi- asms which characterized some of his predecessors and contemporaries.

G. A. Lindeboom, who has been en- gaged in preparing a bibliography of Boerhaave's works and editing Boer- haave's correspondence, gives us in this volume a collection of pictures of the famous physician. He also includes such information as is available re- garding the artists and the circum- stances surrounding production of the pictures.

Boerhaave was painted by Aert de Gelder (a pupil of Rembrandt), by Cornelius Troost, and by two unknown artists. There are also a number of drawings and engravings, two marble busts, several medallions, a Wedgewood plaque, and a large statue. All of these are portrayed in black and white plates and are described and fully identified. The book is a useful addition to the Boerhaave literature.

AARON J. IHDE

University of Wisconsin

and will hopefully arouse new interest in this famous French mathematician.

THOMAS L. HANKINS

University of Washington

G. A. Lindeboom (Editor). Iconographia Boerhaavii (Volume 4 of Analecta Boer- haaviana). ix + 31 pp., 40 pits. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1963.

Herman Boerhaave taught medicine at the University of Leiden for thirty- seven years (1701-1738) and played an important role in the development of medical education. He recognized the place of chemistry in medicine without being carried away by the overenthusi- asms which characterized some of his predecessors and contemporaries.

G. A. Lindeboom, who has been en- gaged in preparing a bibliography of Boerhaave's works and editing Boer- haave's correspondence, gives us in this volume a collection of pictures of the famous physician. He also includes such information as is available re- garding the artists and the circum- stances surrounding production of the pictures.

Boerhaave was painted by Aert de Gelder (a pupil of Rembrandt), by Cornelius Troost, and by two unknown artists. There are also a number of drawings and engravings, two marble busts, several medallions, a Wedgewood plaque, and a large statue. All of these are portrayed in black and white plates and are described and fully identified. The book is a useful addition to the Boerhaave literature.

AARON J. IHDE

University of Wisconsin

and will hopefully arouse new interest in this famous French mathematician.

THOMAS L. HANKINS

University of Washington

G. A. Lindeboom (Editor). Iconographia Boerhaavii (Volume 4 of Analecta Boer- haaviana). ix + 31 pp., 40 pits. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1963.

Herman Boerhaave taught medicine at the University of Leiden for thirty- seven years (1701-1738) and played an important role in the development of medical education. He recognized the place of chemistry in medicine without being carried away by the overenthusi- asms which characterized some of his predecessors and contemporaries.

G. A. Lindeboom, who has been en- gaged in preparing a bibliography of Boerhaave's works and editing Boer- haave's correspondence, gives us in this volume a collection of pictures of the famous physician. He also includes such information as is available re- garding the artists and the circum- stances surrounding production of the pictures.

Boerhaave was painted by Aert de Gelder (a pupil of Rembrandt), by Cornelius Troost, and by two unknown artists. There are also a number of drawings and engravings, two marble busts, several medallions, a Wedgewood plaque, and a large statue. All of these are portrayed in black and white plates and are described and fully identified. The book is a useful addition to the Boerhaave literature.

AARON J. IHDE

University of Wisconsin

Richard Waller (Translator). Essayes of Natural Experiments, Made in the Academie del Cimento, under the jro- tection of the Most Serene Prince Leo- pold of Tuscany. A facsimile of the 1684 edition, with a new introduction by A. Rupert Hall. (The Sources of Science.) xx + 170 pp., plts., index. New York/London: Johnson Reprint Corp., 1964.

Richard Waller (Translator). Essayes of Natural Experiments, Made in the Academie del Cimento, under the jro- tection of the Most Serene Prince Leo- pold of Tuscany. A facsimile of the 1684 edition, with a new introduction by A. Rupert Hall. (The Sources of Science.) xx + 170 pp., plts., index. New York/London: Johnson Reprint Corp., 1964.

Richard Waller (Translator). Essayes of Natural Experiments, Made in the Academie del Cimento, under the jro- tection of the Most Serene Prince Leo- pold of Tuscany. A facsimile of the 1684 edition, with a new introduction by A. Rupert Hall. (The Sources of Science.) xx + 170 pp., plts., index. New York/London: Johnson Reprint Corp., 1964.

243 243 243

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 21:11:47 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions