Freethought & Rationalism Archive

lpetrich · 01-07-2010, 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by lpetrich

However, early Xian theologians were very different.

I'm sure that Tertullian looked forward to watching Thales suffer there.

Right.

That's the same Tertullian who wrote this:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...tullian10.html

It [the intellect] is sharpened by learned pursuits, by the sciences, the arts, by experimental knowledge, business habits, and studies; it is blunted by ignorance, idle habits, inactivity, lust, inexperience, listlessness, and vicious pursuits.

He thought that existing learning was OK, because it's something like the Bible.

However, new learning he did not value. He didn't seem to appreciate the thought that one could learn more than past generations had known -- sometimes a LOT more. And learn by our own effort, rather than having it revealed to us.

Quote:

In the same link I gave above, Tertullian criticizes Thales:
* For saying that the soul was made out of water

Is that any worse than believing that it's composed of some immaterial substance?

Quote:

* For falling into a well as an example of 'the enormous preoccupation of the philosophic mind, that it is generally unable to see straight before it'. (Famously, Thales fell into a well because he 'studied the stars yet could not even see the ground at his feet'.)

Yes, an absent-minded-professor story. But Tertullian ought to have *admired* Thales for his dedication to his pursuit of learning and his resulting martyrdom.

avi · 01-07-2010, 03:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

... This is the subject of Carrier's PhD thesis. He provides a working definition of science and shows that the ancients did science, in terms of making observations, conductiong experiments, and building theories.

Clearly the scientific method has continued to be refined. But are you going to claim that there was no medical science before the second half of the 20th century because there were no double blind, controlled tests of medicines?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Concerning Ibn Sina's Canon of Medicine dating from 1025:

The Canon of Medicine was the first book dealing with evidence-based medicine, experimental medicine,[17] clinical trials, randomized controlled trials,[19][20] efficacy tests,[21][22] risk factor analysis, and the idea of a syndrome in the diagnosis of specific diseases.[26]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The point is that something was lost in the Dark Ages.

Has it been found yet?

How about our own pursuits, here on the forum? What about this thread? Where's the data to support, or repudiate the contention that Christianity either facilitated or hindered the evolution of scientific inquiries?

We employ logic, and reasoning, and persuasion, and argument. That is not the method of Aristotle, or Aristarchus, or Eratosthenes. They sought data, performed measurements, and subjected competing hypotheses to rigorous analysis based upon observation.

Yes, one can trick the brain, as arriving sensory information is interpreted, however, analysis of such data is still more likely to reveal the truth, than conjuring up images from fantastic, acknowledged, supernatural sources.

By demanding conformance to Jewish prescriptions, however modified by Christianity or Islam, leaders of society have destroyed scientific inquiry, by definition.

There can be no harmony between a rigid, unyielding "truth" regarding some fact, which has already been defined, and, contrarily, an earnest compulsion to inquire, investigate, and analyze, in order to challenge that definition. When the latter modus is understood by political powers as representing a challenge to their authority, then the consequence is bloodshed.

avi

GakuseiDon · 01-07-2010, 04:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lpetrich

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Right.

That's the same Tertullian who wrote this:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...tullian10.html

It [the intellect] is sharpened by learned pursuits, by the sciences, the arts, by experimental knowledge, business habits, and studies; it is blunted by ignorance, idle habits, inactivity, lust, inexperience, listlessness, and vicious pursuits.

He thought that existing learning was OK, because it's something like the Bible.

However, new learning he did not value. He didn't seem to appreciate the thought that one could learn more than past generations had known -- sometimes a LOT more. And learn by our own effort, rather than having it revealed to us.

Now how on earth could you know that? It's difficult to know what he thought about 'new learning' because he (like most of the writings we have by Christians at this time) was writing in defence of a Christianity that was undergoing persecution for its religious beliefs. There is little 'pro-science' or 'anti-science' in early writings, simply because it wasn't a topic that was relevant to them.

So how can you know that???

(ETA) This is Tertullian's view on "reason", which is similar to those of Medieval Christians who developed methodological naturalism:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...tullian20.html

Reason, in fact, is a thing of God, inasmuch as there is nothing which God the Maker of all has not provided, disposed, ordained by reason--nothing which He has not willed should be handled and understood by reason.

Toto · 01-07-2010, 10:39 AM

Carrier on Tertullian

These are my notes from his talk, FWIW

Quote:

The first scientifically educated Christian was Clement of Alexandria, who said that people are afraid of science, like children are afraid of masks. But he still didn't like curiosity, and only studied science to be able to refute it. His Christianly only used science as auxiliary to gospels

Tertullian referred to "stupid curiosity on natural objects."

By Tertullian's day, scientists had proven that all mental functions resided in the brain and had even mapped the brain and the nerves - Galen had already done his work. But Tertullian dismisses this in his book on the Soul, saying it is better not to know what god has not revealed.

Lactantius continued Tertullian's work and denied that the earth was round. As evidence he pointed to how ridiculous it would be if there were upside down people on the other side of the earth. (By this time, astronomers had developed empirical proofs that the earth was a sphere and had made reasonable estimates of the size of the earth. They observed how lighthouses disappeared below the horizon, lunar eclipses were observed at different hours of the night in Babylon and Rome; the rising and setting of stars depends on latitude, some are not visible at all; shape of earth's shadow on the moon during an eclipse.)

Lacantius held that natural science is "superfluous useless and vain; only the uneducated masses are wise. Lactantius became the tutor for Constantine's son, and one of the most admired authors - admired by Eusebius.

Later in that Thread, Antipope claimed that Tertullian was a known anti-intellectual, but had ultimately been on the losing side.

Clivedurdle · 01-07-2010, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Back Again

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Are you sure about that?
http://www.archimedespalimpsest.org/...t_making1.html

Nice link, Clive. It nicely addresses what could happen to manuscripts that were no long felt to be relevant or important.

The works by Archimedes were geometry however and thus don't say much about scientific methods or THE scientific method. Geometric proofs start with a handful of axioms and are built up by successively introducing more theorems which are themselves all rigorously proven.

Ahh, but that is what is so fascinating about Archimedes! He was both very practical and theoretical, he was continually testing stuff out and revising thinking. This is actually part of how he wrote as well, his drawings do not illustrate arguments but are central parts of the arguments.

We can miss this because we habitually split theory and practice.

And this was how the Greeks did stuff!

The book has a fascinating chapter about this. This theory over here practice over there is a later development, probably related to xianity and ideas of minds and bodies, contemplation - so heavenly minded no earthly use. Scholasticism was its apogee - actually we are probably still struggling to get back to the Greek idea of praxis - which is probably why so much of our technology is so inefficient and polluting.

bacht · 01-07-2010, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Back Again

Nice link, Clive. It nicely addresses what could happen to manuscripts that were no long felt to be relevant or important.

The works by Archimedes were geometry however and thus don't say much about scientific methods or THE scientific method. Geometric proofs start with a handful of axioms and are built up by successively introducing more theorems which are themselves all rigorously proven.

Ahh, but that is what is so fascinating about Archimedes! He was both very practical and theoretical, he was continually testing stuff out and revising thinking. This is actually part of how he wrote as well, his drawings do not illustrate arguments but are central parts of the arguments.

We can miss this because we habitually split theory and practice.

And this was how the Greeks did stuff!

The book has a fascinating chapter about this. This theory over here practice over there is a later development, probably related to xianity and ideas of minds and bodies, contemplation - so heavenly minded no earthly use. Scholasticism was its apogee - actually we are probably still struggling to get back to the Greek idea of praxis - which is probably why so much of our technology is so inefficient and polluting.

I dunno Clive, modern science is amazingly precise. Pollution and such are political and economic issues I would say (as in poor people using dirty technology or rich people refusing to change consumption habits)

Clivedurdle · 01-07-2010, 11:11 AM

Science over here technology over there may be another symptom. Interestingly this may be primarily an english speaking disease.

Clivedurdle · 01-07-2010, 11:16 AM

A couple of years ago in Germany in a town at lunchtime, a car drove up with a trailer and parked outside the town hall.

The trailer had full blacksmithing equipment, and once it was all fired up, he invited the local kids to start hammering and bashing the red hot iron.

No gloves or goggles.

Children learning real skills of thinking and doing and observing.

In Britain it would be banned on health and safety grounds!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-07-2010, 11:11 AM	#67
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Science over here technology over there may be another symptom. Interestingly this may be primarily an english speaking disease.

01-07-2010, 11:16 AM	#68
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	A couple of years ago in Germany in a town at lunchtime, a car drove up with a trailer and parked outside the town hall. The trailer had full blacksmithing equipment, and once it was all fired up, he invited the local kids to start hammering and bashing the red hot iron. No gloves or goggles. Children learning real skills of thinking and doing and observing. In Britain it would be banned on health and safety grounds!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.