Search

Posljednji đerski i prvi pečuški tezarij Josipa Franje Domina, sastavljeni od 25 teza »iz eksperimentalne fizike«, a naslovljeni De corpore generatim, bili su prvi tezariji što ih je Zagrepčanin tiskao nakon što je objavio raspravu Dissertatio physica de aeris factitii genesi, natura, et utilitatibus (1784.), a izlažu jezgru prirodne filozofije u obliku nauka o ustroju tvari, temeljnim silama u prirodi i općim svojstvima tijelā, zatim mehaniku i nauk o gravitaciji te osnove kemije i astronomije. Tiskani u travnju 1785. i 1786. godine, oni označuju prijelomnicu u Dominovim prirodnofilozofskim gledištima. U đerskom tezariju 1785. Domin prvi put poimence spominje Boškovića i prvi put zadaje tezu o kemiji kao znanosti. Prvi spomen Boškovićeva prezimena podudara se s Dominovom transformacijom iz strogoga boškovićevca, kakav je bio u tezarijima od 1778. do 1784. godine, u prirodnoga fillozofa koji se nastoji izboriti za vlastite uvide. Teza o kemiji kao »znanosti podređenoj eksperimentalnoj fizici« svjedoči pak o utjecaju Dominova kompendija o kemiji plinova, ali je i programatski korak naprijed: »najjednostavnija počela« tijela Zagrepčanin naziva molekulama. U pečuškom tezariju 1786. Domin prvi put dodaje tezu o sili inercije, kamenu kušcu tadašnjih prirodnofilozofskih rasprava. Stoga oznaka »iz eksperimentalne fizike« s naslovnice tezarija ne znači da Domin isključuje prirodnu filozofiju iz svojih razmatranja, štoviše, ne znači da Domin prestaje biti filozofom prirode. Upravo obratno, kao »profesor teorijske i eksperimentalne fizike te mehanike kao i poljoprivrede« Domin se suočava s cijelim prirodnofilozofskim nasljeđem epohe, a glavni su mu sugovornici Newton, Bošković i dva boškovićevca: Leopold Biwald u Grazu i Ivan Krstitelj Horvath u Trnavi, Budimu i Pešti. Svoje stavove Domin ponekad oblikuje prema Boškovićevu tumačenju, ponekad s izričitim odmakom od Boškovića, a ponekad se vraća izvornom Newtonu., Two exam thesauri De corpore universim by Josip Franjo Domin, composed of 25 theses in the field of “experimental physics”, the last published in Györ in 1785 and the first published in Pecs in 1786, saw light soon after the printing of his treatise Dissertatio physica de aeris factitii genesi, natura, et utilitatibus (1784), and expounded the core of natural philosophy in the form of a doctrine of the structure of matter, fundamental forces in nature, and general properties of physical bodies, then mechanics and doctrine of gravitation, along with the basis of chemistry and astronomy. Being published in April 1785 and April 1786, they represent a turning­point in Domin’s views in natural philosophy. In the 1785 thesaurus, Domin for the first time mentions Bošković by name, and also for the first time proposes a thesis on chemistry as science. The first mention of Bošković’s surname corresponds with Domin’s transformation from a strict Boscovichian, as confirmed in the the sauri from 1778 to 1784, into a natural philosopher who comes forth with his own insights. The thesis on chemistry as “a science subordinated to experimental physics” is the fruit of Domin’s compendium on the chemistry of gases, yet, at the same time, is a programmatic step forward: Domin refers to “the simplest principles” of the bodies as molecules. In the 1786 thesaurus Domin introduces the thesis on inertia, touchstone of the then discussions in the field of natural philosophy. Therefore, “experimental physics” suggested in the thesauri title does not imply that Domin excluded natural philosophy from his considerations. Quite the reverse: as a “professor of theoretical and experimental physics, mechanics, and agriculture”, Domin is challenged by the legacy of the natural philosophy of the epoch, notably by Newton, Bošković and two Boscovichians – Leopold Biwald in Graz and Ivan Krstitelj Horvath in Tyrnau, Buda and Pest. Thus Domin either tends to mould his views in accordance with Bošković’s natural philosophy, or departs from Bošković or Boscovichians significantly, or shifts towards the natural philosophy of Newton.

(short abstract) In 1797, Ivan Krstitelj Horvath published his book against Kant’s Kritik der reinen Vernunft under the title Declaratio infirmitatis fundamentorum operis Kantiani ‘Critik der reinen Vernunft’. It was originally conceived as a supplement to his university textbook Institutiones metaphysicae (1767). Horvath targeted his criticism at the foundations of Kant’s first Kritik, among which he expectedly included Kant’s doctrine of space and time. He was convinced that Kant’s argument »Der Raum wird als eine unendliche gegebene Größe vorgestellt.« (A 25, B 39) may be successfully refuted by using Bošković’s arguments expounded in De spatio ac tempore (1755). (long abstract) In 1797, Ivan Krstitelj Horvath, the professor emeritus of the University of Pest, published his book against Kant’s Kritik der reinen Vernunft under the title Declaratio infirmitatis fundamentorum operis Kantiani ‘Critik der reinen Vernunft’. It was originally conceived as a supplement to his university textbook Institutiones metaphysicae, which he as a Jesuit and professor at the University of Tyrnau first published in 1767. Horvath based his assessment on the first edition of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, although he also consulted its second, revised edition before sending the manuscript to print, so that Kant’s important quotations are provided with the pagination of the first and second edition of the Critique. Although aimed to refute Kant systematically, on the pages of his book Horvath repeatedly drew the reader’s attention to the novelty of Kant’s thought: a fundamentally new philosophical language, new terms, new meanings given to old terms, new approach in the elaboration of the operations of our mind, new doctrine of space and time, new philosophical system (novum Systema philosophicum). Horvath targeted his criticism at the foundations of Kant’s Critique, among which he expectedly included Kant’s doctrine of space and time. In his first attempt to refute Kant’s views on space and time (pp. 17-30), Bošković was not explicitly mentioned. But when, in a second attempt, in the chapter »Examinatur Kantiana de spatio et tempore doctrina« (pp. 90-133), Horvath systematically confronted Kant’s arguments on space, he was convinced that Kant’s argument »Der Raum wird als eine unendliche gegebene Größe vorgestellt.« (A 25, B 39) may be successfully refuted by using Bošković’s arguments expounded in De spatio ac tempore (1755), later included as the supplement to his masterpiece Theoria philosophiae naturalis (1758, 1759, 1763). »In the Newton-Bošković system (I myself have adopted)«, he stated, Bošković’s two theses are validly proved: 1. prime elements of bodies are to be simple and unextended, on account of which they are usually called points of matter (materiae puncta) ; 2. these elements of bodies cannot come to the very mathematical contact, but with the help of attractive and repulsive forces are to be connected in such a way that at a certain exiguous distance they repel one another. Horvath had an additional reason to refer to Bošković in his criticism of Kant’s doctrine of space and time. In his textbook Institutiones metaphysicae, in the chapter »Dissertatio altera complectens cosmologia«, he expounded three of Bošković’s doctrines: 1. on prime elements of bodies as simple and unextended points of matter ; 2. on space and time as two real modi existendi ; 3. on attractive and repulsive forces dependent on the distance between points of matter. In the revised edition (editio novissima) of the textbook Institutiones metaphysicae (1782) Horvath left out the chapter on Bošković’s attractive and repulsive forces, yet he continued to follow all the three doctrines—the very doctrines that, in his opinion, could help him successfully refute Kant’s views on space and time.