Science and the modern worldWhitehead, Alfred North
Religion
Science and the modern world
Whitehead, Alfred North
Science
civilisation, Pagan, Christian, Mahometan. In that period a great deal
was added to science. But on the whole the progress was slow and
wavering; and, except in mathematics, the men of the Renaissance
practically started from the position which Archimedes had reached.
There had been some progress in medicine and some progress in astronomy.
But the total advance was very little compared to the marvellous success
of the seventeenth century. For example, compare the progress of
scientific knowledge from the year 1560, just before the births of
Galileo and of Kepler, up to the year 1700, when Newton was in the
height of his fame, with the progress in the ancient period, already
mentioned, exactly ten times as long.
Nevertheless, Greece was the mother of Europe; and it is to Greece that
we must look in order to find the origin of our modern ideas. We all
know that on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean there was a very
flourishing school of Ionian philosophers, deeply interested in theories
concerning nature. Their ideas have been transmitted to us, enriched by
the genius of Plato and Aristotle. But, with the exception of Aristotle,
and it is a large exception, this school of thought had not attained to
the complete scientific mentality. In some ways, it was better. The
Greek genius was philosophical, lucid and logical. The men of this group
were primarily asking philosophical questions. What is the substratum of
nature? Is it fire, or earth, or water, or some combination of any two,
or of all three? Or is it a mere flux, not reducible to some static
material? Mathematics interested them mightily. They invented its
generality, analysed its premises, and made notable discoveries of
theorems by a rigid adherence to deductive reasoning. Their minds were
infected with an eager generality. They demanded clear, bold ideas, and
strict reasoning from them. All this was excellent; it was genius; it
was ideal preparatory work. But it was not science as we understand it.
The patience of minute observation was not nearly so prominent. Their
genius was not so apt for the state of imaginative muddled suspense
which precedes successful inductive generalisation. They were lucid
thinkers and bold reasoners.
Of course there were exceptions, and at the very top: for example,
Aristotle and Archimedes. Also for patient observation, there were the
astronomers. There was a mathematical lucidity about the stars, and a
fascination about the small numerable band of run-a-way planets.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account