[Desmanchei-me a rir, quando liguei estas duas passagens – como não se ser sensível ao choque tectónico entre uma cabeça do século XVII e uma do século XX, quando tudo se tornou mais pessoal e pequenino? Bruxas?! Precisamente. Mas não sobre o mesmo fundo…]
«But what exactly is ‘experimental’ reasoning? [If we look at the vast seventeenth-century literature on witchcraft, it is full of reports of careful observations and sworn evidence – even of experiments. Glanvill, the house philosopher of the early Royal Society, regarded witchcraft as the paradigm of experimental reasoning.]»
– Imre Lakatos (1922-1974), “Science and pseudo-science” (1973). NOTE: Within square brackets , there are additional passages that Lakatos subsequently included in the text version of his radiophonic talk, published in “Philosophy in the Open” and in “The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes: Philosophical Papers”, vol. 1.
«And if any thing were to be much admired (…), it would be to me matter of Astonishment, that Men (…) are falling into the conceit that there’s no such thing as a Witch or Apparition, but that these are the creatures of Melancholy and Superstition, foster’d by ignorance and design, which, comparing the confidence of their disbelief with the evidence of the things denied, and the weakness of their grounds, would almost suggest that themselves are an argument of what they deny: and that so confident an Opinion could not be held upon such inducements, but by some kind of Witchcraft and Fascination in the Fancy. And perhaps that evil Spirit, whose influences they will not allow in Actions ascribed to such Causes, hath a greater hand and interest in their Proposition than they are aware of.»
– Joseph Glanvill (1636-1680), “Some philosophical considerations touching the being of witches and witchcraft” (1667).