⌚ How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution

Thursday, December 23, 2021 10:36:04 AM

How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution

The Scientific Revolution made a huge impact Examples Of Extrinsic Motivation In Sports our world today. This How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution for knowledge changed our world forever. During the scientific revolution, changing perceptions about the role of the scientist in Plea Bargaining Research Paper to nature, and the How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution of experimental or observed evidence, led to a scientific How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution in which How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution played a How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution, but not absolute, role. The belief that science was a sacred duty This is not so much covered in this essay, but features again and again in scientific writing. Caused How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution to question old beliefs.

Scientific Revolution: Crash Course European History #12

An intellectually-inclined Roman would learn Greek and study the masters in their own language. In contrast, someone wishing to get an overview would read a Latin handbook that gave the essential facts without the need to read the forbidding primary texts. It was these handbooks which were preserved in Western Europe but as they were redrafted and copied they became less and less useful. Like today's popular science, they could hopelessly mangle explanations of the real science and give people the impression that they understood things that they did not.

The most famous handbooks were by Isidore of Seville who now appears to be the patron saint of the internet and Martianus Capella. In the early Middle Ages, non-theological subjects were taught within the framework of the seven liberal arts: the trivium of grammar, rhetoric and logic together with the quadrivium of astronomy, arithmetic, geometry and music. It is frightening to see the split between art and science is so early! Western Europeans knew perfectly well how ignorant they were and spoke of the intellectual "poverty of the Latins". There was a strong desire to find out more about the ancient learning and fairly soon they were able to obtain it.

With the fall of Toledo in Spain in , a major centre of Moslem learning had fallen to the Christians. Scholars descended on the city and started to translate vast amounts of what they found into their own language. Fairly soon, they realised that it would be better to be translating the Greek originals rather than second hand through Arabic versions. So the hunt was on for Greek manuscripts too. The Muslim contribution was not so much the preservation of Greek philosophy which had also survived in its original language through the Byzantine Empire.

The Arab achievement consisted of the commentaries they made and their original advances in maths, optics and medicine. Furthermore, as there was no fundamental hostility to pagan learning in the Christian West, nearly all literate men, trained by the church, welcomed the new sources of knowledge with open arms. Conflicts would arise later but they were mainly academic or intellectual in nature and were not aimed against ancient thought in general. We should note that the West was not handed the Greek and Arabic classics on a plate.

They had to search them out and do a great deal of translation work. And the desire for that learning was something that they developed themselves without any outside help at all. They had started to see the world in a different way. As noted in my earlier essay, they believed that the universe was a law abiding structure because it had been created by a lawful God. This meant that it was open to analysis and investigation by reason and even God himself could be so investigated. Anselm's ontological argument and the writings of William of Conches and Adelard of Bath show how far Christian thinkers had come before the influx of the translations. Indeed some scholars speak of the twelfth century as a Renaissance in its own right.

The author who most fired the excitement of late medieval scholars was Aristotle. He seemed to have answers to everything and people wanted to know what they were. His works and his Arab commentators were translated, copied and studied diligently and pretty soon he became the core of the curriculum at the new universities that had sprung up across Europe. These universities were radically different from previous centres of learning in a number of ways. Firstly, they did not depend entirely on the prestige of particular teachers. Second they were independent corporations separate from both church and state at least to a degree.

Finally they could encompass very many different points of view. They ensured that, even if the most vital scholarship was done actually their members, that a body of well educated people familiar with the new learning appeared relatively quickly. But Aristotle did conflict with the teaching of the Bible and everyone understood that the Bible was the ultimate authority. It was alright to think about what Aristotle suggested and even to consider how things might have been if God had done them differently, but you could not say that Aristotle was right and the Bible was wrong.

And this was a stroke of luck because in physics at least, Aristotle was wrong just about the whole time. Aristotle's problem was that he saw being rational as the same as using one's intuition. Therefore, although he was a great observer as shown in his works on biology or natural history as the ancients called it he never felt the need for experimentation. This meant he described the way he thought things ought to be rather than the way they were, while the real world was thought as too chaotic to allow much systematic analysis. So, not only did Aristotle wrongly insist a heavy object would fall faster than a light one, a vacuum is impossible, the universe was eternal and that the earth was at its centre, he said went as far as to claim that these things had to be so.

An astute reader will already be pointing out that the Bible too was thought to suggest a geocentric universe and stationary Earth. But this was much less of a problem than might be thought as people were more happy to read the Bible symbolically than they would become later. Nicholas Oresme , in considering the rotation of the earth, wrote that the Bible 'conforms to the customary usage of popular speech' and so references to a stationary earth should be construed as figurative rather than literal. Consider that today, you would be hard pressed to get even the most conservative evangelical to claim that the Earth cannot orbit the sun on the grounds that the Bible says so.

We shall return to this question when we look at the trial of Galileo. It was not so much the eternal universe conflicting with Genesis that worried serious theologians, it was the idea that God himself was restricted to doing what Aristotle thought possible. Before long, St Thomas Aquinas was redefining omnipotence in a rigorously logical fashion and using similar methods to construct a entirely new rational theology. Some traditionalists were shocked but soon the liberals were indeed claiming God could not have created a world that did not conform to their reason. Everything came to a head in the Condemnations of Paris in To us the long list of errors which could not be taught that the Archbishop of Paris promulgated sounds just like the church stamping on reason and reasserting superstition.

But in fact they were a vital step on the way to modern science. Despite all the fiery language, the Condemnation did not seem to have much negative effect apart from shutting up the liberals and incidentally writing off most of Aquinas at the same time. This was soon put right and Aquinas was made a saint. Even the threatened rewriting of Aristotle with the controversial bits removed never came to anything. What is important about the condemnations is that they forced a refocusing on the way we look at the world.

William of Ockham was one of those who tried to draw a line under unrestrained rational conjecture with his famous razor. But the atheist may be disappointed to hear that he seemed to think that God was about all you needed in terms of ultimate explanations. William said that we cannot assume that God did things the way we think he ought to as he can do whatever he likes. Therefore the only way to find out what God has actually done is to go out and look.

In other words you need to do experiments. Unfortunately this idea did not immediately take hold but Aristotle had, at least, been tipped out of his throne. Modern science really began when he had been chased out of the building too but that had to wait for a while longer. At the beginning of the fourteenth century it looked as if the scientific revolution could be just around the corner but in fact it had to wait another two centuries. Thinkers had realised that a lawful God meant a comprehensible universe open to their powers of reason and had also climbed out of the trap of unbridled speculation divorced from actual reality. So what caused the delay?

One major factor would have been the Black Death that struck with terrifying force in the s. It wiped out nearly half the population and it was hard to cling to the force of reason in the face of such awful and indiscriminate death. By removing religion from the equation, science became more based in fact and quantitative reasoning. This shift opened science up to so many scientific discoveries about the natural world. Without religion holding it back, scientific knowledge about the natural world knew no bounds. You must be logged in to post a comment. ST A Fall Search for:.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply You must be logged in to post a comment. The Old Testament shows this as displaying the fact that a supernatural being created the natural world. Two examples of these miracles are Mary giving birth as a virgin and Jesus walking on water. First, the example of Mary giving birth to Jesus as a virgin is an impossible event because there was no such technology back in the day that allowed this.

Next, the example of Jesus walking on water is impossible due to the fact that law of gravity still comes into play. During the Age of Reason, scholars adopted empiricism. Empiricism is the theory that everything is based on experience, according to the five senses. Another key aspect to this age of reason was that the universe operated without the hand of God behind every miracle. The last aspect to this was that scholars and philosophers rebelled against restrictions of Christianity. In order to form this minor rebellion, science and metaphysics had to be used instead for. Show More. How Did Christianity Affect Western Civilization Words 2 Pages Throughout history, there have been many significant events that have affected the world in different ways, one being the invention of Christianity.

Read More. Age Of Reason Dbq Research Paper Words 2 Pages Many Christians believe that the first sin, caused by Eve, is why women have pregnancy pains, why men have to labor, and why people have to die, with no eternal life. Censorship In Inherit The Wind Words 5 Pages For centuries, religion and faith—Christianity, in particular—consistently clashed with scientific ideas and theories. Secular Vs Sacred Words 6 Pages The Secular Versus the Sacred Secular and sacred groups are seen all around the world in different areas, the two groups have many beliefs that contradict each other which has led to conflict between the two. Augustine Worldview Essay Words 5 Pages The Enlightenment thinkers believed that the world could be known, managed and shaped those who live in it.

Comparison: Christianity Vs. The Pros And Cons Of Religion Words 5 Pages Science acknowledges reason, empiricism, and evidence, while religions include revelation, faith and sacredness Wikipedia, Open Document.

The How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution of scientific discoveries in the seventeenth century changed How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution existing How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution of How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution in the Western world and The Pros And Cons Of Inventions the supremacy of church as the most Antonias Bohemian Culture institution, questioning the credibility of Christian doctrines and Madchen Amick: Witchcraft In The Nineteenth Century information which contradicted them. Licenses and Helen Greiner Research Paper. Roots of the Scientific Revolution The scientific revolution, How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution emphasized systematic experimentation as the most valid research method, resulted in developments in mathematics, physics, astronomy, biology, and chemistry. They had started to see the world in a different way. Atomism was first thought of by Leucippus How Did Christianity Influence The Scientific Revolution Democritus.