Triple argumentation in defense of the circulation of blood

Abstract

The theory of the circulation of blood has captured the attention of historians and philosophers of science for many years. One of the main goals of these works was to study the process by which William Harvey discovered his theory, and the method that he applied to prove it. These studies usually emphasize the importance of the experiments he carried out in the context of the so called ''scientific revolution of the 17th century''. In this article, we want to show that there exists a triple argumentation (at least) in his defense of the circulation of the blood, which includes not only his observations and experiments but also arguments by analogy and teleological arguments.