So, I have discovered that my blog's are WAY too long. I guess I'm still in the transition between A-levels and lectures where before I felt it necessary to write pages and pages (as you can see in my previous blog's) but I plan to break the habit and introduce myself to this idea of summarising. My lecturers will be jumping for joy as they will no longer have to sit for hours reading through my excessive note taking. What a great way to put this idea into practise by starting with philosophy.
Attributed to Kojotomoto
Astronomy, known as the study of the heavens was key for the Aristotelian scholastics who had dominated the European universities for centuries. The Aristotelian's and Scholastics viewed the world in terms of it's perfections and purposes, meaning that things had essences that defined them and their purposes. Everything moved accordingly to their purposes, for example earth and flesh fell to the earth where as fire could rise towards the heavens. Ptolemys system fitted perfectly with these ideas as he believed the earth was at the centre of the universe. The moon, sun, planets and the fixed orbs of stars revolved around the earth in a perfect, unchanging circular motion, portraying this idea that the celestial heavens were close to God.
Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
Bacon was one of the countless number who entered into a uni system that had essentially been unchanged for hundreds of years, this system created mainly to train a clergy. Bacon however opposed violently to the Aristotelian and Scholastic approach, finding it barren and circular. He condemned the European philosophical movement for the great mistake of mixing religion and natural philosophy (more commonly known as science) together as this created a confusion and obsession with word play not action. He believed that people should not interpret and discuss theories but change them and prove them to be correct. Bacon dismissed European thoughts and wanted a complete break from the ancient world and the Greeks therefore producing a book known as The New Organon, seen as a direct attack against Aristotle. This had four themes...
Knowledge is human power, with this we have the ability to hardness power and to navigate this power.
There must be a separation of science from religion.
The method for acquisition of new knowledge is induction. General theories must proceed to an experiment.
Science must be seen as a dynamic. It is always correcting itself as well as co-operative meaning it must be shared as well as cumulative, it is always being added to.
Bacon believed in only one method. This being the scientific method as he found it protected us from the idols of the mind. However this could be seen as a very biased idea as ideals in the individual or society may hinder true perception. Bacons death was seen as an act of a martyr as he died whilst carrying out an experiment.
Locke (1632-1704)
Locke believed that our understanding comes from our experiences which is worked on by our powers of reason to produce "real knowledge". Locke was violently against "innate ideas" believing that our minds at birth are a "blank slate" given to us by God, who then gave us the ability to discover knowledge and morality therefore meaning that innate ideas were not needed. When masters of faith go beyond reason and experience, these individuals should be guided by private revelation, however these revelations should never be imposed upon by the church or the state.
Copernicus (1473-1543)
Copernicus was a 16th century polish astronomer who attempted to reform the calender, which then led him to devise a system in which he discovered the sun was actually at the centre of the universe. This was known as the Heliocentric model, suppressed and offered to the world simply as a model by which one could work out calculations but not be seen as a true picture of reality. Johannes Kepler was drawn to Copernicus's unproven hypothesis and spent decades working out date and calculations which would prove the Heliocentric model and vastly improve on Copernicus's theory.
Galileo (1564-1642)
Galileo, born the day Michelangelo died and died the day Newton was born was an Italian mathematician. Kepler influenced Galileo as he has perfected a Dutch invention known as the telescope, which allowed the naked human eye to observe the heavens with degrees of magnitude no-one had ever dreamed of. This moment of true revelation with the power of observation linked to the mathematic calculations took precedent over any kind of presumptive theory. This was Galileo's most revolutionary assault on the Aristotelian scholatism as it proved the distinction between what he termed primary and secondary qualities. Secondary qualities were deemed not real in the objects themselves but depended upon human perception where as primary qualities were all quantative, this being the dimension, mass, shape and measurable were all understood in mathematical law. Scholastics believed that humility was accepting what the ancients had written where as Galileo believed that humility was accepting what God had written in the book of nature. "Facts, said Galileo, are determined by nature, not by men and not by books." The scholastics did not know how to study what God had created in nature, to read the book of nature, one must understand its language - maths. Without this, the book of nature is indecipherable. Galileo was eventually brought before inquisition and shown the instruments of torture, leading him to recant. He remained under house arrest until his death. For the first time, the human mind was looking at Gods works with comprehensions.
Newton (1642-1727)
Locke saw himself as a clearer, clearing the ground for scientists like Newton. Newton convinced people that the world was ordered and knowable, welcoming us to The Clockwork Universe. After Newtons influence, Aristotle's physics was discredited and the rest of Aristotle's systems of thought, undermined. Newton dominated the world of science until most of it was destroyed by Einstein in the 20th century, arguably the beginning of the Enlightenment.
Excellent notes. On length, there is no ideal length, people will differ. There are some people who like to 'think out loud' in writing, others who like to form a view in their mind first and then write it. I think generally the latter approach is more suited to journalism. But writing HCJ notes in not the same as doing journalism (as you are about to explore when we start doing practical journalism writing towards the end of the term). So whatever works for you is fine. I have now seen ntoes on these topics hundred of times, so I can read them quickly. But with your notes - and many people at wincehster especially in your year - I find reading the notes often entertaining and often very useful for clarifying my own thinking on these topics. So thanks for that and keep up the very good work.
ReplyDelete