Western Civilization: Origins and Rise of Science and Cosmology - Coursework Example

and Number of the Western Civilization: Origins and Rise of Science and Cosmology Introduction The ancestors of early humans understood many natural laws and developed skills in making useful tools. The achievements of nameless “Egyptians, Sumerians, Chinese, Maya and others” (Bunch and Hellemans 1) included the growth of mathematical rules, cure of illnesses, construction of great structures, creation of new materials, and understanding of the stars and planets. The successes are related to a collection of skills, rather than a knowledge of science. Science as an organised discipline began with the Ionian school of Greek philosophers, 600 B.C, while modern scientific development is believed to have started only from the end of the 15th century. . Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether it was only by chance that science has its origins in the western civilization, or whether it was inevitable. The characteristics of early western civilization that distinguished it from other civilizations, and caused the birth and development of science will be determined. Discussion The history of science is a part of the history of human culture, and has its roots in the remote past (Sedgwick 3), going back to the origins of human society. However, science took a definite shape only by the end of the fifteenth century. At this time, discovery of the New World was the beginning of a great chapter in history, while there was an equal level of interest in further explorations of the Old World (Sedgwick 226). Cosmological questions have occupied people in all civilizations from the earliest times. The birth of modern science was based on two concepts: the organised conceptualising of the priest or philosopher, along with the practical functioning of the craftsman. The key to understanding the history of science lies in the interaction between the theoretical and practical activities of man. Primitive science was related to the basic needs of procuring food, avoiding pain and death. This was followed by the first great revolution in human society with the discovery of agriculture in a small region in the Near East. Besides the introduction of the domestication of animals, spinning, weaving, pottery, and metals, agriculture made possible the development of science through social institutions related to trade and emergence of towns (Bernal 13,14). Trade and barter required the development of some form of standard, bringing measure and number into practical use in the form of arithmetic and algebra, which were needed in business as early as 4000 B.C. Mechanics, physics and chemistry were used in crafting permanent houses, machinery and other essentials. Theory was differentiated from practise: the priest as a man of writing, theology and metaphysics, as against the craftsman as a man of practice. Hence, combining both science and material development became more difficult, uncertain and liable to lapses (Bernal 15). Astronomy The only two fields in which theory and practice were integrated together were Astronomy and Medicine. Astronomy was applied practically in the fundamental activity of agriculture, in drawing up the calendar. Astronomy became the domain of priests “to interpret and to foretell the will of the gods” (Bernal 15). Astronomy and science rose from astrology based on precise observations. Elementary mathematics giving an effective account of happenings in the external world arose from Astronomy. “The earliest Greeks, descendants of warriors that invaded the Greek peninsula around 1400 BCE (Before the Common Era), were seafarers and traders” (Bunch and Hellemans 51). They developed navigation skills through the science of astronomy and geometry. The Greeks developed a large number of cosmological models, even though they were less accurate observers of celestial events than the Babylonians. Greek and Hellenistic philosophy believed in the universe as nesting spheres, with earth as the centre of the universe, until the Renaissance. Despite the incorrect theories, Hellenic astronomers correctly calculated the size of earth and distance to the moon. Many Greek writers correctly guessed the nature of the sun, moon, planets and celestial events, but the observational science of the time could not establish whose theories were right or incorrect (Bunch and Hellemans 53). This is supported by Digges (p.134), using the term “orb” to refer to the fixed stars (p.137). “The globe of elements enclosed in the orb of the moon I call the glove of mortality because it is the peculiar empire of death”. The author further states that in the middle of this globe of mortality hangs the planet earth with its magnetic forces, which is a ball of earth and water suspended in thin air. He says that one would expect the huge universe to “sway and turn around”, whereas it is the planet earth which smoothly and imperceptibly revolves on its own axis, each revolution marking the period of one day The sciences of physical and mechanics behind craftsmen’s operations were still too complicated to understand intellectually, but the motions of the heavenly bodies could be reduced to a form easily understood, since they appeared to happen with perfect geometrical regularity. However, it required increasingly arduous efforts of interpretation, giving rise to the discipline of geometry. Astronomy required observation, calculation and work which lasted longer than a single lifetime, necessitating the establishment of stable governments and empires. “Science as an institution was born in the temple observatories” (Bernal 16). Copernicus was a Polish astronomer and mathematician who proposed the theory of the Earth revolving round its own axis once in twenty-four hours, and once in a year around a stationary sun. This viewpoint contrasts with Digges’ conceptualisation of the earth as the centre of the universe, as seen above. Copernicus’ book De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, published just prior to his death in 1543, is perceived as the starting point of the scientific revolution, and modern astronomy (Kuhn 1). According to Koestler (p.124), Copernicus, whose original name was Canon Koppernigk, considered himself “a philosopher and mathematicus of the skies, who left the work of actual stargazing to others, and relied on the records of the ancients”. Copernicus noted down a total of sixty to seventy observations in his life-time. He used the star Spica as a basic landmark. However, his calculations were incorrect by around forty minutes arc, exceeding the width of the moon. This resulted in Copernicus’ life work appearing to be wasted. The Copernican planetary tables were found by seafarers and stargazers to be only a small improvement from the earlier Alphonsine tables; hence were considered unusable. The Copernican system on the theory of the universe, replete with inconsistencies and arbitrary constructions, was also perceived to be unsatisfactory, particularly to the scholar himself. Copernicus’ views were rejected by the Catholic Church, but his views on the earth rotating around the stationary sun at the centre, was later used by other scientists. Philosophy: a Precursor to Science The Greeks were the first to believe that intellectual reasoning was important for understanding the universe, rather than mythology or religion. Through impersonal natural forces rather than personal forces or gods, they strove to find explanations for all natural phenomena. The early researchers were philosophers and not scientists, since few of them performed experiments. However, the early Greek philosophers: Thales, Anaximander and Anaximenes were the first to investigate general principles beyond observation. Some Greek philosophers like Pythagoras, Aristotle, and Archimedes were also scientists who performed experiments (Bunch and Hellemans 51). Greek science and mathematics began with the Ionian school of natural philosophy shortly after 600 BCE, named after the Greek region of Ionia where it originated. Ionian philosophers introduced the earliest form of scientific method which was grounded in reasoning and observation and very little experimentation. They formulated different theories regarding the causes of natural phenomena and the nature of matter. While atomists believed reality to be embodied in matter, the followers of the philosopher Pythogoras saw the universe as form and number. Central to Greek science were Plato and Artistotle; the former was heavily influenced by the Pythagoreans and the latter relied more on observation. Aristotle, the most important scholar of Greek antiquity developed the inductive method of deducing general principles from observations of phenomena, and using these principles to explain other phenomena (Bunch and Hellemans 52). The Hellenistic or larger Greek colonies around the Mediterranean Sea spread their culture and science, resulting in Hellenism becoming stronger particularly in Egypt. “The centre of Greek culture moved to Alexandria after Roman rule became predominant with the occupation of Greece in 146 BCE. With the rise of the Christian Church in the 3rd Century CE which related science to heathenism, Hellenistic science went into decline. The Roman empire is notable for not having any advancement in science for a long period of time, when compared with Greek and Hellenistic science. There was no Roman science as such, though many Hellenistic progresses occurred under Roman rule (Bunch and Hellemans 52). “Although the main thread of western civilization runs through Greece and Rome, there were contemporaneous advances in other parts of the world” (Bunch and Hellemans 52). The early Persian empire built canals and bridges that were advanced for that time, as well as a unique bow made from horn. Four regions where inherently different civilizations developed were: China, India, Mesoamerica and the Coast of Peru. In Mesoamerica were found the descendants of eastern Mexico with the Maya of central America. Both Chinese and Maya developed advanced mathematics including the concept of place value, and observational astronomy. Chinese astronomers began to compile star maps 400 years before the first Hellenistic versions, but they did not develop a theoretical basis for astronomy as the Greek astronomers did. The Peruvian coastal cities created crafts and construction works, but were not progressive in writing. Chinese technology was far more advanced than that of the Romans in inventions, materials such as porcelain, agriculture and construction works. Further, the compass and ship’s rudder were developed by the Chinese when they were still unknown in the west. In North America the Mound Builders, and the Anasazi in the south West though not as advanced as Mesoamerica, shared the same technology. In the South Pacific the Polynesians did not progress beyond building their outrigger canoes, but later created unique statues and inscriptions (Bunch and Hellemans 52). Reasons for the Origins and Rise of Modern Science in Western Civilization The origins of science go back a long way to ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, but it is an indisputable fact that modern science was born in western Europe and in no other civilization. Particular attributes and circumstances that were distinctive of early western society contributed to the emergence of science. These characteristics went beyond mere expertise in “technical scientific subjects, experiments, and disciplined observations” (Grant 105+). Many early civilizations developed science; until around 1500, mathematics, astronomy, geometric optics, and medicine were in a more advanced form in Islam than in the west. The main drawback was that science was not institutionalised in Islamic society. Similarly, it was not institutionalised, established or perpetuated in ancient and medieval China in spite of the civilization’s significant technological achievements. Certain fundamental occurrences in western Europe from 1175 to 1500 helped science to take root as the foundations of modern science. During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the scientific revolution in astronomy, cosmology and physics took place only because of certain distinctive events in the late Middle Ages. From the latter half of the twelfth century to the thirteenth century, a great movement took place, in which translations from the Greek and Arabic languages into Latin was carried out. These translations helped a great deal in supporting the scientific revolution. The reason is that it would have taken several centuries for western Europe to reach the level of Greco-Arabic science, without the translations (Grant 105+). Another reason for the rise of science in early western civilization was the formation of the medieval university “with its corporate structure and control over its varied activities” (Grant 105+). Soon after most of the translations were completed, in the thirteenth century appeared universities in Paris, Oxford, and Bologna which were the first of their kind. These medieval universities have continued over the last eight centuries, with a sustained endurance, and developed into global phenomena. “Nothing in Islam or China, or India, or in the ancient civilizations of South America is comparable to the medieval university” (Grant 105+); and this is one of the significant corner stones of modern science. Medieval Latin society supported the separate existence of Church and state, each of which recognized the autonomy due to universities and other institutions. The Latin translations from Arabic and Greek texts provided a science-based curriculum with logic, geometry, astronomy and natural philosophy, to the emerging universities. This curriculum continued for 450 to 500 years, besides other disciplines such as theology and medicine. Christians utilized Greek philosophy, particularly metaphysics and logic to better understand and explain the Holy Scripture and other religious factors, besides using astronomy and mathematics in daily life. The third precondition for the birth of science in early western civilization, and the developments leading to the scientific revolution, was the emergence of a class of theologian-natural philosophers. They sanctioned the “introduction and use of Aristotelian natural philosophy in the curriculum of the new universities” (Grant 105+). This helped the disciplines of Aristotelian natural philosophy and science along with theology to become part of the curriclum of medieval universities. The western adoption of natural philosophy is in complete contrast to the treatment given by the civilization of Islam to natural philosophy. Study of the discipline was considered to be potentially dangerous to the faith. Although for several centuries: from the ninth to the end of the fifteenth, the level of science in Islam was more advanced than that in western Europe, natural philosophy was not included in the educational process. This difference between the civilizations of the early west and Islam caused the former to progress significantly in science development. Besides the three preconditions discussed above, “the reasons why science took root in western society must ultimately be sought in the nature of the science and natural philosophy that were developed” (Grant 105+). The roles of natural philosophy and the exact sciences differed contrastingly. The brilliant efforts of Copernicus produced the new heliocentric astronomy; and this was adopted by the Aristotelian natural philosophers. However, medieval natural philosophy gradually declined by the seventeenth century. However, the scholastic culture of free inquiry, emphasis on reason, approaches to nature, and key problems of the new science continued in a sustained manner. Further, emerging from the Middle Ages was the deep sense of legitimacy and importance accorded to these activities, “that discovering the way the world operated was a laudable undertaking” (Grant 105+). In the Middle Ages, in Italy, the history of medicine was changed by permitting the dissection of human cadavers. This was not allowed by other cultures such in Egypt, and in the Islamic world. In the Latin West, it was not objected to by the Church; hence facilitated the acquiring of scientific knowledge of the human body (Grant 105+). Conclusion This paper has highlighted the evidence that science has its origins in the western civilization. The characteristics of early western civilization that differentiate it from those of other civilizations such as those of China and early Persia; and were key to the birth and development of science were discussed. This conclusion is supported by Grant (p.105+), who states that vital features of medieval science such as Aristotelian natural philosophy formed the basis for uninterrupted scientific development “that began in Western Europe and spread around the world”. Greek astronomy, philosophy as a precursor to modern science, the Hellenistic culture and the Roman empire reveal powerful evidence regarding the western origins of science. Though other civilizations and cultures developed simultaneously, and were more advanced in some respects such as technological advancement, astronomers such as those from China did not have a theoretical basis for their astronomy, unlike the Greek astronomers. The interaction between theory and the practical aspects that concern people is central to the development of science. The philosophy behind the work of astronomers such as Copernicus has been determined. Particular events from 1175 to 1500 in early western civilization facilitated the emergence and development of science leading to the scientific revolution. These were the extensive translations from the Greek and Arabic languages into Latin, the formation of medieval westen European universities with a curriculum of Greco-Arabic science and natural philosophy, and the emergence of theologian, natural philosophers. The rise of science and cosmology from primitive and medieval times and the features of western civilization that allowed the birth of science have been discussed. Works Cited Bernal, John D. The social function of science. Edition 2. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1944. Bunch, Bryan H. & Hellemans, Alexander. The history of science and technology: a browser’s guide to the great discoveries, inventions, and the people who made them, from the dawn of time to today. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2004. Digges, Thomas. This little dark star wherein we live. In Dennis R. Danielson (Ed.) The book of the cosmos: Imagining the universe from Heraclitus to Hawking. Massachusetts: Perseus Books, 2000, pp.132-139. Grant, Edward. When did modern science begin? American Scholar, 66.1 (Winter 1977): 105+ Koestler, Arthur. The sleepwalkers: a history of man’s changing vision of the universe. New York: Macmillan, 1959. Kuhn, Thomas S. The Copernican revolution: planetary astronomy in the development of western thought. Edition 8. The United States of America: Harvard University Press, 1985. Sedgwick, W.T. A short history of science. The United States of America: Read Books Publishers, 2007. Read More