@article {Ducheyne2009a,
	title = {Understanding (in) {N}ewton{\textquoteright}s Argument for Universal Gravitation},
	journal = {Journal for General Philosophy of Science},
	volume = {40},
	number = {2},
	year = {2009},
	pages = {227-258},
	abstract = {<p>In this essay, I attempt to assess Henk de Regt and Dennis Dieks recent pragmatic and contextual account of scientific understanding on the basis of an important historical case-study: understanding in Newtons theory of universal gravitation and Huygens reception of universal gravitation. It will be shown that de Regt and Dieks Criterion for the Intelligibility of a Theory (CIT), which stipulates that the appropriate combination of scientists skills and intelligibility-enhancing theoretical virtues is a condition for scientific understanding, is too strong. On the basis of this case-study, it will be shown that scientists can understand each others positions qualitatively and quantitatively, despite their endorsement of different worldviews and despite their convictions as what counts as a proper explanation.</p>},
	keywords = {1713, 1726), Actio in distans, D. Dieks, Discours de la cause de la pesanteur (1690), H. de Regt, Huygens, Incommensurability, Newton, Principia (1687, Scientific understanding, Spherical vortex cosmology, Theoretical virtues, Universal gravitation},
	issn = {0925-4560},
	doi = {10.1007/s10838-009-9096-y},
	url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10838-009-9096-y},
	author = {Ducheyne, Steffen}
}
