| Encyclopedia Article |  | from | | Encarta | |  |
Scientific Revolution, the period roughly between 1500 and 1700 during which the foundations of modern science were laid down in Western Europe. Before this period, nothing like science in the modern sense existed. | II | | Understanding of the Physical World in the Middle Ages | | print section |
Throughout the Middle Ages, formal attempts to understand the physical world were developed, chiefly in the arts and medical faculties of the medieval universities. This natural philosophy, as it was known, derived almost entirely from the teachings of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle. Most of the brilliant legacy of ancient Greek thought had been lost to Western Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire in the 5th century. When this legacy began to be recovered from Byzantine and Islamic sources where it had to some extent been preserved, it was the works of Aristotle that had the most immediate impact and began to dominate Western philosophical thought (see Western Philosophy). The learning in the two most powerful faculties of the medieval university system, the faculties of divinity and of law, was based on ancient writings: the Bible and Roman Law, as codified by Byzantine emperor Justinian I in the Corpus Juris Civilis (534; Body of Civil Law). The arts and medical faculties tended to follow suit, with the result that study focused not on the natural world itself, nor on the techniques of practical healing, but instead on the writings of Aristotle and Galen, who was the equivalent medical authority in ancient times. Concentration on the study of texts meant that there was little or no practical study or experimentation within the university curricula. This tendency to avoid practical subjects was reinforced by Aristotle's own teachings on how natural philosophy should be conducted and on the correct way of determining the truth of things. He rejected the use of mathematics in natural philosophy, for example, because he insisted that natural philosophy should explain phenomena in terms of physical causes. Mathematics, being entirely abstract, could not contribute to this kind of physical explanation. Even those branches of the mathematical sciences that seemed to come close to explaining the physical world, such as astronomy and optics, were disparaged as “mixed sciences” that tried to combine the principles of one science, geometry, with those of another, physics, in order to explain the behavior of heavenly bodies or rays of light. But the results, according to Aristotle, could not properly explain anything. Although geometry and arithmetic were taught in the university system they were always regarded as inferior to natural philosophy and could not be used, therefore, to promote more practical approaches to the understanding of nature. Within the universities, even the study of plants and animals tended to be text-based. Students learned their knowledge of flora, for example, from the compilations of herbal and medicinal plants by the Greek physician Pedanius Dioscorides, leaving more localized and practical knowledge to lay experts in herbal lore outside the university system. Similarly, alchemy and other empirical (based on experimentation and observation) aspects of the natural magic tradition were pursued almost entirely outside the university system.  Continue reading article
This fragmentation of studies concerned with the workings of nature was reinforced throughout the Middle Ages by the Roman Catholic Church. After some initial problems with non-Christian aspects of Aristotelian teaching, the Church embraced such teaching as a handmaiden to the so-called “queen of the sciences,” theology. The Church considered Aristotelian natural philosophy to provide support to religious doctrines, but other naturalist pursuits were considered to be subversive. The Church tended to be suspicious of natural magic, for example, even though natural magic was simply concerned with the demonstrable properties of material bodies (such as the ability of magnets to attract iron or the ability of certain plants or their extracts to cure diseases). One way or another, therefore, the powerful combination of Aristotelian teachings with Church doctrines tended to exclude direct study and analysis of nature. The situation began to change during the Renaissance, a period of tremendous cultural achievement in Europe that began in the early 14th century and ended about 1600. The scientific revolution can be seen as a major aspect of the sweeping and far-reaching changes of the Renaissance. In broad terms the scientific revolution had four major aspects: the development of the experimental method, the realization that nature obeys mathematical rules, the use of scientific knowledge to achieve practical aims, and the development of scientific institutions. | A | | Development of Experimental Method |
The Renaissance was the period when the experimental method, still characteristic of science today, began to be developed and came increasingly to be used for understanding all aspects of the physical world. Previously, the natural world had been thought to be comprehensible based on thoughtful consideration alone. The experimental method holds that understanding comes through hands-on trial and error under controlled conditions. The experimental method was not in itself new—it had been a common aspect of the natural magic tradition from ancient times. For example, all the experimental techniques used by the English physicist William Gilbert, author of what is generally acknowledged to be the earliest example of an experimental study of a natural phenomenon, De Magnete (1600; Of Magnets, Magnetic Bodies, and the Great Magnet of the Earth, 1890), were first developed by Petrus Peregrinus, a renowned medieval magus (magician). Experimentation was a major aspect of the natural magic tradition and was ready for appropriation by Renaissance natural philosophers who recognized its potential. The experimental methodology used in magic became more acceptable to Renaissance scholars thanks to the rediscovery of ancient magical writings. Religious opposition to magic had less force after the discovery of various writings allegedly written by Hermes Trismegistus, Zoroaster, Orpheus, and other mythical or legendary characters. We now know these texts were written in the early centuries of the Christian Era and deliberately attributed to such legendary authors, but Renaissance scholars believed they were genuinely ancient documents. This gave the texts great authority and led to increased respect for magical approaches. Increased emphasis on experience and observation complemented the adoption of manipulative experimental techniques. Andreas Vesalius, innovative professor of surgery at the University of Padua, claimed to have noticed over 200 errors in Galen's anatomical writings when he performed his own dissections. Scholars had previously relied on Galen’s works rather than performing their own dissections. Vesalius's emphasis upon a return to anatomical dissection led to major discoveries. William Harvey, who was taught by one of Vesalius's successors at Padua, discovered that blood circulates through the body. Similarly, the discovery of numerous new species of animals and plants in the New World led to a more empirical approach to natural history. Previously, bestiaries (books containing collected descriptions of animals) and herbals (books containing collected descriptions of plants) had included religious symbolism, legends, superstitions, and other nonnatural lore. Since there was no equivalent information about newly discovered species, however, herbals and bestiaries compiled after the Renaissance were more likely to record properties based on actual observation. The advent of printing also played an important part in the transmission of accurate information. When the circulation of texts depended upon handwritten copies, illustrations were often crudely executed by the various scribes who copied the book. Subsequent copies of the copy could be unrecognizable. In the preparation of a printed edition, however, a skilled illustrator could be called in to prepare a single illustration that would then be mass-produced. The standard of illustrations improved immeasurably. Almost inevitably the illustrations became more realistic and stimulated a concern for proper observation of natural phenomena. Another important aspect of the new focus on experimentation and observation (empiricism) was the invention of new observational instruments. The Italian astronomer Galileo, for example, used the telescope—first developed for commercial purposes—to make astonishing astronomical observations. His exciting success stimulated the development of a whole range of instruments for studying nature, such as the microscope, thermometer, and barometer. | B | | Mathematization of Nature |
The scientific revolution has also been characterized as the period of the “mathematization of the world picture.” Quantitative information and mathematical analysis of the physical world began to be seen to offer more reliable knowledge than the more qualitative and philosophical analyses that had been typical of traditional natural philosophy. The mathematical sciences had their own long history, but thanks to Aristotle's strictures they had always been kept separate from natural philosophy and regarded as inferior to it. Aristotle's authority weakened throughout the Renaissance, however, as the rediscovery of the writings of other ancient Greek philosophers with views widely divergent from those of Aristotle, such as Plato, Epicurus, and the Stoics, made it plain that he was by no means the only ancient authority. As skepticism became credible in light of the remarkable exposures of the failings of traditional intellectual positions, mathematics became an increasingly powerful force. Mathematicians claimed to deal with absolute knowledge, capable of undeniable proof and so immune from skeptical criticisms. The full story of the rise in status of mathematics is complex and crowded. Notable contributors included Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus, who claimed that, for no other reason than that the mathematics indicated it, Earth must revolve around the Sun, and German astronomer Johannes Kepler, who reinforced this idea with astronomical measurements vastly more precise than any that had previously been made. Copernicus’s moving Earth demanded a new theory of how moving bodies behave. This theory of motion was effectively initiated as a new mathematical science by Galileo and reached its pinnacle a few decades later in the work of Isaac Newton. | C | | Practical Uses of Scientific Knowledge |
Experimentalism and mathematization were both stimulated by an increasing concern that knowledge of nature should be practically useful, bringing distinct benefits to its practitioners, its patrons, or even to people in general. Apart from supporting dubious medical ideas, the only use to which natural philosophy had been put throughout the Middle Ages was for bolstering religion. During the scientific revolution the practical usefulness of knowledge, an assumption previously confined to the magical and the mathematical traditions, was extended to natural philosophy. To a large extent this new emphasis was a result of the demands of new patrons, chiefly wealthy princes, who sought some practical benefit from their financial support for the study of nature. The requirement that knowledge be practically useful was also in keeping, however, with the claims of the Renaissance humanists that the vita activa (active life) was—contrary to the teachings of the Church—morally superior to the vita contemplativa (contemplative life) of the monk because of the benefits an active life could bring to others. The major spokesman for this new focus in natural philosophy was Francis Bacon, one-time Lord Chancellor of England. Bacon promoted his highly influential vision of a reformed empirical knowledge of nature that he believed would result in immense benefits to mankind. | D | | Development of Scientific Institutions |
Finally, the scientific revolution was also a period during which new organizations and institutions were established for the study of the natural world. While the universities still tended to maintain the traditional natural philosophy, the new empirical, mathematical, and practical approaches were encouraged in the royal courts of Europe and in meetings of like-minded individuals, such as the informal gatherings of experimental philosophers in Oxford and London that occurred during the 1650s. The Royal Society of London was established on a formal basis in 1660 by attendees of those earlier gatherings. Although nominally under the patronage of Charles II, the Royal Society received no financial support from the monarchy. A similar French society, the Académie des Sciences de Paris, however, was set up by Jean-Baptiste Colbert, Louis XIV's controller-general of finance, and its fellows were paid from the treasury. Whatever their precise constitution, the proliferation of collaborative scientific societies testifies to the widespread recognition that, as Bacon wrote, “knowledge is power,” and knowledge of nature is potentially extremely powerful. These four factors—the experimental method, the mathematization of nature, the emphasis on the practical usefulness of scientific knowledge, and the development of scientific institutions—interacted with one another and were historically dependent upon one another. In combination their impact on European culture was phenomenal. To begin with, it rapidly became apparent that the traditional Aristotelian natural philosophy was completely wrong. Aristotelian teaching was so broad in scope, however, providing a ready explanation for all phenomena, that it could not simply be abandoned. New innovations and theories chipped away at Aristotelian teaching, but they were independently derived and did not hang together to provide a comprehensive alternative system. What was required was a completely new philosophy of nature that could incorporate Copernican astronomy, Galileo's new theory of motion, Harvey's new physiology, and all the other new discoveries, and show how they followed from certain basic assumptions. This ambition began to be realized in the early 17th century with the development of mechanical philosophy. There were a number of slightly different versions of this new philosophy, but their common foundation was the belief that the universe functions like clockwork according to rules and without outside intervention. The most influential early version of mechanical philosophy was developed by French philosopher and scientist René Descartes. Powerful as Descartes's system was, its conclusions, which Descartes arrived at purely by a process of abstract reasoning, were not always compatible with experimentally determined phenomena. In late 17th-century England, a more empirically based version of mechanical philosophy was developed. The success of this version was triumphantly confirmed in 1687 with the publication of Isaac Newton's Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy). Beginning with Descartes and culminating with Isaac Newton, the development of mechanical philosophy can be seen as the foundation of the modern scientific world-view. Previously, the dominant vision of the nature of the world had been provided by religion. Natural philosophy had been merely an adjunct to religion, a means of demonstrating God's existence and omnipotence through the study of the intricacies of nature. The fragmentation of Western Christianity after the Reformation, however, led to a weakening of religion. Furthermore, the rise of philosophical skepticism during the Renaissance quickly led to skepticism in religion. Advertisement |
Atheism, previously unknown in Christian Europe, gradually became an increasingly popular alternative to religion. Ironically, although all of the major figures in the scientific revolution were devoutly religious and saw their scientific work as a way of proving the existence of an omnipotent creator, the new mechanical philosophies were appropriated by atheists. Those who wished to deny the validity of the religious world-view could use the new philosophies to suggest that the world was capable of functioning in an entirely mechanistic way with no need for supernatural intervention or supervision. Newton's influence upon European culture was entirely unprecedented. The undeniable success of his Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (1687) in understanding and describing the workings of nature convinced many that by applying the same methods, all problems could be solved, even moral, political, and economic problems. Many of the central beliefs of the Enlightenment and new social sciences developed at that time owed their origins to the powerful stimulus of Newtonian science. But all too often it was a Newtonian science devoid of the God that Newton himself had believed in. Newton was especially devout and explicitly stated that his system was intended to demonstrate the existence of God, but he was powerless to prevent the irreligious interpretation of his science. From then on the secular scientific world-view became increasingly dominant. | Page 1 of 2 | Next Page  |
| 
