Download
1 / 27
270 likes | 481 Vues
. SCIENCE and SPIRITUALITYORICL 471Wednesdays at 11:00, April, 2008. Neil GreenbergDepartments of Ecology, Medicine, and PsychologyUniversity of Tennessee, Knoxville. ORICL April 2008. . . . Neil GreenbergDepartments of Ecology, Medicine, and PsychologyUniversity of Tennessee, Knoxville. ORICL April 2008.
E N D
1. "Two powerful and respected men, victims of converging cultural and personal circumstances near the end of the nineteenth century, found, as some men sometimes do, an excuse to declare war.
Romantics were saying that Natural Philosophy SCIENCE, will clip an Angels wings, Conquer all mysteries by rule and line, Empty the haunted air and gnomed mine-- Unweave a rainbow. (Keats); the world was being disenchanted (Max Weber).
Further, strange and possibly dangerous religions from across the sea were threatening America's sacred shores. The mystery that energizes the spiritual impulse was about to be solved.
The Warfare Conflict -- Model: two separate & warring camps reinforced by both sides.
But historians reject the idea that scientific & religious views have been historically antagonistic they were fabricated in the late 19th century by Draper and White
"Two powerful and respected men, victims of converging cultural and personal circumstances near the end of the nineteenth century, found, as some men sometimes do, an excuse to declare war.
Romantics were saying that Natural Philosophy SCIENCE, will clip an Angels wings, Conquer all mysteries by rule and line, Empty the haunted air and gnomed mine-- Unweave a rainbow. (Keats); the world was being disenchanted (Max Weber).
Further, strange and possibly dangerous religions from across the sea were threatening America's sacred shores. The mystery that energizes the spiritual impulse was about to be solved.
The Warfare Conflict -- Model: two separate & warring camps reinforced by both sides.
But historians reject the idea that scientific & religious views have been historically antagonistic they were fabricated in the late 19th century by Draper and White
2. LEFT HEMISPHERE
Coherence: creates a stable and internally consistent belief system works hard to save appearances (Ramachandran 1998)
Probabilistic reasoning (Osherson et al 1998)
Abstract object recognition (Marsolek 1999)
RIGHT HEMISPHERE
Correspondence: tests reality and if damaged, confabulation runs rampant (Ramachandran 1998)
Deductive reasoning (Osherson et al 1998)
Specific object recognition (Marsolek 1999)
LEFT Probabilistic reasoning incr activity in dorsolateral frontal area
RIGHT Deductive reasoning prevalence of occipital and parietal activity
Osherson et al 1998 Distinct brain loci in deductive versus probabilistic reasoning (Neuropsychologia 36(4):369-376)
============================
Marsolek, Chad J 1999 Dissociable neural subsytems underlie abstract and specific object recognition. Psychologiucal Science 10(2):111-117.
============================
The asymmetry of brain function is well enough known, especially with respect to language: not only are the sounds of speech specified in the left hemisphere, by syntactical structure of speech and semantics- the orderliness of speech are apparently left hemisphere functions. (The right hemisphere, on the other hand, seems involved with the more subtle and expressive aspects of speech; also affect). The neurologist V.S. Ramachandran is fascinated by the panoply of denial that can be mustered by many brain damaged patients. In his view, the left hemisphere (like Gazzanigas interpreter) sifts through the superabundance of detail presented to it so as to order it into a stable and internally consistent belief system -- a story that make sense of of the available evidence (1998:.134) and how is new information handled? It is either ignored or squeezed into your preexisting framework, to preserve stability. This, Ramachandran proposes, is the essential rational behind all the so-called |Freudian defenses the denials, repressions, confabulations and other forms of self delusion that govern our daily lives. Far from being maladaptive, such every day defense mechanisms prevent the brain from being hounded into directionless indecision by the combinatorial explosion of possible stories that might be written from the material available to the senses. The penalty of course, is that you are lying to yourself, but its a small price to pay for the coherence and stability on the system as a whole (p 134-135) (and see Daniel Golemans Vital Lies, Simple Truths (1985) and the willing suspension of disbelief.).
Ramachandran points out that after strokes of the emotional right hemisphere, patients tend to be blissfully unconcerned about their predicament, even mildly euphonic, because without the emotional right hemisphere they simply dont comprehend the magnitude of their loss (1998:134)
Ramachandra, VS and Sandra Blakeslee. 1998. Phantoms in the Brain. Morrow, New York. 328 pp.
Gazzanigas interpreter is a left-hemisphere capacity to make an inference about both internal bodily states and external actions of ourselves and others . . . a powerful system that is at the core of human belief formation . . . . a capacity that saves us from being completely beholden to the environment -- and thus in someways has outsmarted itself. (p. 113). (Howard Bloom called my attention to Gazzaniga)
The right hemisphere, on the other hand is Ramachandrans revolutionary rather than saving appearances and maintaining the status quo if even by lying to ones self, the right hemisphere is Kuhnian in its force of a paradigm shift when anomalies can no longer be credibly accommodated when it is damaged, the left hemispheres confabulations can run rampant.LEFT HEMISPHERE
Coherence: creates a stable and internally consistent belief system works hard to save appearances (Ramachandran 1998)
Probabilistic reasoning (Osherson et al 1998)
Abstract object recognition (Marsolek 1999)
RIGHT HEMISPHERE
Correspondence: tests reality and if damaged, confabulation runs rampant (Ramachandran 1998)
Deductive reasoning (Osherson et al 1998)
Specific object recognition (Marsolek 1999)
LEFT Probabilistic reasoning incr activity in dorsolateral frontal area
RIGHT Deductive reasoning prevalence of occipital and parietal activity
Osherson et al 1998 Distinct brain loci in deductive versus probabilistic reasoning (Neuropsychologia 36(4):369-376)
============================
Marsolek, Chad J 1999 Dissociable neural subsytems underlie abstract and specific object recognition. Psychologiucal Science 10(2):111-117.
============================
The asymmetry of brain function is well enough known, especially with respect to language: not only are the sounds of speech specified in the left hemisphere, by syntactical structure of speech and semantics- the orderliness of speech are apparently left hemisphere functions. (The right hemisphere, on the other hand, seems involved with the more subtle and expressive aspects of speech; also affect). The neurologist V.S. Ramachandran is fascinated by the panoply of denial that can be mustered by many brain damaged patients. In his view, the left hemisphere (like Gazzanigas interpreter) sifts through the superabundance of detail presented to it so as to order it into a stable and internally consistent belief system -- a story that make sense of of the available evidence (1998:.134) and how is new information handled? It is either ignored or squeezed into your preexisting framework, to preserve stability. This, Ramachandran proposes, is the essential rational behind all the so-called |Freudian defenses the denials, repressions, confabulations and other forms of self delusion that govern our daily lives. Far from being maladaptive, such every day defense mechanisms prevent the brain from being hounded into directionless indecision by the combinatorial explosion of possible stories that might be written from the material available to the senses. The penalty of course, is that you are lying to yourself, but its a small price to pay for the coherence and stability on the system as a whole (p 134-135) (and see Daniel Golemans Vital Lies, Simple Truths (1985) and the willing suspension of disbelief.).
Ramachandran points out that after strokes of the emotional right hemisphere, patients tend to be blissfully unconcerned about their predicament, even mildly euphonic, because without the emotional right hemisphere they simply dont comprehend the magnitude of their loss (1998:134)
Ramachandra, VS and Sandra Blakeslee. 1998. Phantoms in the Brain. Morrow, New York. 328 pp.
Gazzanigas interpreter is a left-hemisphere capacity to make an inference about both internal bodily states and external actions of ourselves and others . . . a powerful system that is at the core of human belief formation . . . . a capacity that saves us from being completely beholden to the environment -- and thus in someways has outsmarted itself. (p. 113). (Howard Bloom called my attention to Gazzaniga)
The right hemisphere, on the other hand is Ramachandrans revolutionary rather than saving appearances and maintaining the status quo if even by lying to ones self, the right hemisphere is Kuhnian in its force of a paradigm shift when anomalies can no longer be credibly accommodated when it is damaged, the left hemispheres confabulations can run rampant.
3. Like Freuds theory in Civilization and its Discontents, a fundamental tension exists between words and their meaning: thus closely resembles the tension between individuals and civilization that Freud wrote about.
INDIVIDUALS seek validation of their understanding, their meaning, and CIVILZATION has a contrary demand for conformity.
Like Freuds theory in Civilization and its Discontents, a fundamental tension exists between words and their meaning: thus closely resembles the tension between individuals and civilization that Freud wrote about.
INDIVIDUALS seek validation of their understanding, their meaning, and CIVILZATION has a contrary demand for conformity.
4. WAR? What War? misconceptions about the traditional relationship of science and religion
for example, that science doubts everything, religion accepts on faith.
Test everything. Hold on to the good (I Thessalonians 5:21)
I cannot praise a cloistered virtue (Milton)
If a man shall begin in certainties, he shall end in doubts; but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. (Francis Bacon 1605)
5. WAR? What War? If it happens that the authority of sacred Scripture is set in opposition to clear and certain reasoning, the person who interprets Scripture does not understand it correctly. ?It was Galileo who understood, better than his persecutors, how to reconcile apparent contradictions between faith and science. If reason leads humankind to discover a truth that seems to be incompatible with the Bible, Galileo argued, then the interpretation of Scripture, not the rational conclusion, should give way. In this he was echoing Augustine, who wrote: ?If it happens that the authority of sacred Scripture is set in opposition to clear and certain reasoning, this must mean that the person who interprets Scripture does not understand it correctly.? Such is the intellectual footwork of a believer who is unprepared to allow the possibility that the Bible might be fallible, but Augustine's work enables Christians to take advantage of scientific and social advances without surrendering the ultimate authority of revelation.
?It was Galileo who understood, better than his persecutors, how to reconcile apparent contradictions between faith and science. If reason leads humankind to discover a truth that seems to be incompatible with the Bible, Galileo argued, then the interpretation of Scripture, not the rational conclusion, should give way. In this he was echoing Augustine, who wrote: ?If it happens that the authority of sacred Scripture is set in opposition to clear and certain reasoning, this must mean that the person who interprets Scripture does not understand it correctly.? Such is the intellectual footwork of a believer who is unprepared to allow the possibility that the Bible might be fallible, but Augustine's work enables Christians to take advantage of scientific and social advances without surrendering the ultimate authority of revelation.
6. Beyond his role in the historical development of astronomy and natural philosophy, Kepler has loomed large in the philosophy and historiography of science. Kepler and his laws of motion were central to early histories of astronomy such as Jean Etienne Montuclas 1758 Histoire des mathmatiques and Jean-Baptiste Delambre's 1821 Histoire de lastronomie moderne. These and other histories written from an Enlightenment perspective treated Kepler's metaphysical and religious arguments with skepticism and disapproval, but later Romantic-era natural philosophers viewed these elements as central to his success. William Whewell, in his influential History of the Inductive Sciences of 1837, found Kepler to be the archetype of the inductive scientific genius; in his Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences of 1840, Whewell held Kepler up as the embodiment of the most advanced forms of scientific method. Similarly, Ernst Friedrich Apelt the first to extensively study Kepler's manuscripts, after their purchase by Catherine the Great identified Kepler as a key to the "Revolution of the sciences". Apelt, who saw Kepler's mathematics, aesthetic sensibility, physical ideas, and theology as part of a unified system of thought, produced the first extended analysis of Kepler's life and work
BUT: Geometry is unique and eternal, a reflection from the mind of God. That mankind shares in it is because man is an image of God."
"I believe it was by divine ordinance that I obtained by chance that which previously I could not reach by any pains; I believe that so much the more readily because I had always prayed to God to let my plan succeed, if Copernicus had told the true." - Kepler on his theory of planetary orbits, which was based on the Copernican system.
"As long as the multitude does not err, I want to be on the side of the many. Therefore, I take great pains to explain to as many people as possible."
"Great is God our Lord, great is His power and there is no end to His wisdom. Praise Him you heavens, glorify Him, sun and moon and you planets. For out of Him and through Him, and in Him are all things..... We know, oh, so little. To Him be the praise, the honor and the glory from eternity to eternity."
"The diversity of the phenomena of nature is so great, and the treasures hidden in the heavens so rich, precisely in order that the human mind shall never be lacking in fresh nourishment."
"The chief aim of all investigations of the external world should be to discover the rational order and harmony which has been imposed on it by God and which He revealed to us in the language of mathematics."
"The Earth is round, and is inhabited on all sides, is insignificantly small, and is borne through the stars."
"Nature uses as little as possible of anything."
"I give myself over to my rapture. I tremble; my blood leaps. God has waited 6000 years for a looker-on to His work."
The debate over Kepler's place in the Scientific Revolution has also spawned a wide variety of philosophical and popular treatments. One of the most influential is Arthur Koestler's 1959 The Sleepwalkers, in which Kepler is unambiguously the hero (morally and theologically as well as intellectually) of the revolution.[73] Influential philosophers of science such as Charles Sanders Peirce, Norwood Russell Hanson, Stephen Toulmin, and Karl Popper have repeatedly turned to Kepler: examples of incommensurability, analogical reasoning, falsification, and many other philosophical concepts have been found in Kepler's work. Physicist Wolfgang Pauli even used Kepler's priority dispute with Robert Fludd to explore the implications of analytical psychology on scientific investigation.[74] A well-received, if fanciful, historical novel by John Banville, Kepler (1981), explored many of the themes developed in Koestler's non-fiction narrative and in the philosophy of science.[75] Somewhat more fanciful is a recent work of nonfiction, Heavenly Intrigue (2004), suggesting that Kepler murdered Tycho Brahe to gain access to his data.[76] Kepler has acquired a popular image as an icon of scientific modernity and a man before his time; science popularizer Carl Sagan described him as "the first astrophysicist and the last scientific astrologer."[77]Beyond his role in the historical development of astronomy and natural philosophy, Kepler has loomed large in the philosophy and historiography of science. Kepler and his laws of motion were central to early histories of astronomy such as Jean Etienne Montuclas 1758 Histoire des mathmatiques and Jean-Baptiste Delambre's 1821 Histoire de lastronomie moderne. These and other histories written from an Enlightenment perspective treated Kepler's metaphysical and religious arguments with skepticism and disapproval, but later Romantic-era natural philosophers viewed these elements as central to his success. William Whewell, in his influential History of the Inductive Sciences of 1837, found Kepler to be the archetype of the inductive scientific genius; in his Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences of 1840, Whewell held Kepler up as the embodiment of the most advanced forms of scientific method. Similarly, Ernst Friedrich Apelt the first to extensively study Kepler's manuscripts, after their purchase by Catherine the Great identified Kepler as a key to the "Revolution of the sciences". Apelt, who saw Kepler's mathematics, aesthetic sensibility, physical ideas, and theology as part of a unified system of thought, produced the first extended analysis of Kepler's life and work
BUT: Geometry is unique and eternal, a reflection from the mind of God. That mankind shares in it is because man is an image of God."
"I believe it was by divine ordinance that I obtained by chance that which previously I could not reach by any pains; I believe that so much the more readily because I had always prayed to God to let my plan succeed, if Copernicus had told the true." - Kepler on his theory of planetary orbits, which was based on the Copernican system.
"As long as the multitude does not err, I want to be on the side of the many. Therefore, I take great pains to explain to as many people as possible."
"Great is God our Lord, great is His power and there is no end to His wisdom. Praise Him you heavens, glorify Him, sun and moon and you planets. For out of Him and through Him, and in Him are all things..... We know, oh, so little. To Him be the praise, the honor and the glory from eternityto eternity."
"The diversity of the phenomena of nature is so great, and the treasures hidden in the heavens so rich, precisely in order that the human mind shall never be lacking in fresh nourishment."
"The chief aim of all investigations of the external world should be to discover the rational order and harmony which has been imposed on it by God and which He revealed to us in the language of mathematics."
"The Earth is round, and is inhabited on all sides, is insignificantly small, and is borne through the stars."
"Nature uses as little as possible of anything."
"I give myself over to my rapture. I tremble; my blood leaps. God has waited 6000 years for a looker-on to His work."
The debate over Kepler's place in the Scientific Revolution has also spawned a wide variety of philosophical and popular treatments. One of the most influential is Arthur Koestler's 1959 The Sleepwalkers, in which Kepler is unambiguously the hero (morally and theologically as well as intellectually) of the revolution.[73] Influential philosophers of science such as Charles Sanders Peirce, Norwood Russell Hanson, Stephen Toulmin, and Karl Popper have repeatedly turned to Kepler: examples of incommensurability, analogical reasoning, falsification, and many other philosophical concepts have been found in Kepler's work. Physicist Wolfgang Pauli even used Kepler's priority dispute with Robert Fludd to explore the implications of analytical psychology on scientific investigation.[74] A well-received, if fanciful, historical novel by John Banville, Kepler (1981), explored many of the themes developed in Koestler's non-fiction narrative and in the philosophy of science.[75] Somewhat more fanciful is a recent work of nonfiction, Heavenly Intrigue (2004), suggesting that Kepler murdered Tycho Brahe to gain access to his data.[76] Kepler has acquired a popular image as an icon of scientific modernity and a man before his time; science popularizer Carl Sagan described him as "the first astrophysicist and the last scientific astrologer."[77]
7. Sir Isaac Newton FRS 4 January 1643 31 March 1727 [OS: 25 December 1642 20 March 1727])[1] was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, alchemist and theologian. His Philosophi Naturalis Principia Mathematica, published in 1687, is said to be the greatest single work in the history of science. In this work, Newton described universal gravitation and the three laws of motion, laying the groundwork for classical mechanics, which dominated the scientific view of the physical universe for the next three centuries and is the basis for modern engineering. Newton showed that the motions of objects on Earth and of celestial bodies are governed by the same set of natural laws by demonstrating the consistency between Kepler's laws of planetary motion and his theory of gravitation, thus removing the last doubts about heliocentrism and advancing the scientific revolution.
In mechanics, Newton enunciated the principles of conservation of momentum and angular momentum. In optics, he invented the reflecting telescope and developed a theory of colour based on the observation that a prism decomposes white light into a visible spectrum. He also formulated an empirical law of cooling and studied the speed of sound.
In mathematics, Newton shares the credit with Gottfried Leibniz for the development of calculus. He also demonstrated the generalized binomial theorem, developed the so-called "Newton's method" for approximating the zeroes of a function, and contributed to the study of power series.
In a 2005 poll of the Royal Society of who had the greatest effect on the history of science, Newton was deemed much more influential than Albert Einstein.[5]
http://www.ltrc.mcmaster.ca/newton/
"Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done."[17] Sir Isaac Newton FRS 4 January 1643 31 March 1727 [OS: 25 December 1642 20 March 1727])[1] was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, alchemist and theologian. His Philosophi Naturalis Principia Mathematica, published in 1687, is said to be the greatest single work in the history of science. In this work, Newton described universal gravitation and the three laws of motion, laying the groundwork for classical mechanics, which dominated the scientific view of the physical universe for the next three centuries and is the basis for modern engineering. Newton showed that the motions of objects on Earth and of celestial bodies are governed by the same set of natural laws by demonstrating the consistency between Kepler's laws of planetary motion and his theory of gravitation, thus removing the last doubts about heliocentrism and advancing the scientific revolution.
In mechanics, Newton enunciated the principles of conservation of momentum and angular momentum. In optics, he invented the reflecting telescope and developed a theory of colour based on the observation that a prism decomposes white light into a visible spectrum. He also formulated an empirical law of cooling and studied the speed of sound.
In mathematics, Newton shares the credit with Gottfried Leibniz for the development of calculus. He also demonstrated the generalized binomial theorem, developed the so-called "Newton's method" for approximating the zeroes of a function, and contributed to the study of power series.
In a 2005 poll of the Royal Society of who had the greatest effect on the history of science, Newton was deemed much more influential than Albert Einstein.[5]
http://www.ltrc.mcmaster.ca/newton/
"Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done."[17]
8. Sir Isaac Newton FRS 4 January 1643 31 March 1727 [OS: 25 December 1642 20 March 1727])[1] was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, alchemist and theologian. His Philosophi Naturalis Principia Mathematica, published in 1687, is said to be the greatest single work in the history of science. In this work, Newton described universal gravitation and the three laws of motion, laying the groundwork for classical mechanics, which dominated the scientific view of the physical universe for the next three centuries and is the basis for modern engineering. Newton showed that the motions of objects on Earth and of celestial bodies are governed by the same set of natural laws by demonstrating the consistency between Kepler's laws of planetary motion and his theory of gravitation, thus removing the last doubts about heliocentrism and advancing the scientific revolution.
In mechanics, Newton enunciated the principles of conservation of momentum and angular momentum. In optics, he invented the reflecting telescope and developed a theory of colour based on the observation that a prism decomposes white light into a visible spectrum. He also formulated an empirical law of cooling and studied the speed of sound.
In mathematics, Newton shares the credit with Gottfried Leibniz for the development of calculus. He also demonstrated the generalized binomial theorem, developed the so-called "Newton's method" for approximating the zeroes of a function, and contributed to the study of power series.
In a 2005 poll of the Royal Society of who had the greatest effect on the history of science, Newton was deemed much more influential than Albert Einstein.[5]
http://www.ltrc.mcmaster.ca/newton/
"Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done."[17] Sir Isaac Newton FRS 4 January 1643 31 March 1727 [OS: 25 December 1642 20 March 1727])[1] was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, alchemist and theologian. His Philosophi Naturalis Principia Mathematica, published in 1687, is said to be the greatest single work in the history of science. In this work, Newton described universal gravitation and the three laws of motion, laying the groundwork for classical mechanics, which dominated the scientific view of the physical universe for the next three centuries and is the basis for modern engineering. Newton showed that the motions of objects on Earth and of celestial bodies are governed by the same set of natural laws by demonstrating the consistency between Kepler's laws of planetary motion and his theory of gravitation, thus removing the last doubts about heliocentrism and advancing the scientific revolution.
In mechanics, Newton enunciated the principles of conservation of momentum and angular momentum. In optics, he invented the reflecting telescope and developed a theory of colour based on the observation that a prism decomposes white light into a visible spectrum. He also formulated an empirical law of cooling and studied the speed of sound.
In mathematics, Newton shares the credit with Gottfried Leibniz for the development of calculus. He also demonstrated the generalized binomial theorem, developed the so-called "Newton's method" for approximating the zeroes of a function, and contributed to the study of power series.
In a 2005 poll of the Royal Society of who had the greatest effect on the history of science, Newton was deemed much more influential than Albert Einstein.[5]
http://www.ltrc.mcmaster.ca/newton/
"Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done."[17]
9. In the late 18th century, the Enlightenment came to an end with a sudden outburst of hostility toward reason and science.
This philosophic temper tantrum has a name: romanticism. The leaders of the movement advocated the primacy of feelings over reason and sense perception, the rejection of logical analysis as anti-life, and the view that nature is an incomprehensible war of conflicting opposites.
With Kant's Critiques providing the fertilizer, romanticism took root mainly in Germany. In this lecture, Mr. Harriman shows that the impact on German science was widespread and devastating in the early 19th century. http://www.aynrandbookstore2.com/prodinfo.asp?number=CH72M
Detailed Descriptionby David Harriman: This lecture analyzes a major turning point in modern history. In the late 18th century, the Enlightenment came to an end with a sudden outburst of hostility toward reason and science. This philosophic temper tantrum has a name: romanticism. The leaders of the movement advocated the primacy of feelings over reason and sense perception, the rejection of logical analysis as anti-life, and the view that nature is an incomprehensible war of conflicting opposites. With Kant's Critiques providing the fertilizer, romanticism took root mainly in Germany. In this lecture, Mr. Harriman shows that the impact on German science was widespread and devastating in the early 19th century.http://www.aynrandbookstore2.com/prodinfo.asp?number=CH72M
Detailed Descriptionby David Harriman: This lecture analyzes a major turning point in modern history. In the late 18th century, the Enlightenment came to an end with a sudden outburst of hostility toward reason and science. This philosophic temper tantrum has a name: romanticism. The leaders of the movement advocated the primacy of feelings over reason and sense perception, the rejection of logical analysis as anti-life, and the view that nature is an incomprehensible war of conflicting opposites. With Kant's Critiques providing the fertilizer, romanticism took root mainly in Germany. In this lecture, Mr. Harriman shows that the impact on German science was widespread and devastating in the early 19th century.
10. Lamia Do not all charms fly
At the mere touch of cold philosophy?
There was an awful rainbow once in heaven:
We know her woof, her texture; she is given
In the dull catalog of common things.
Philosophy will clip an Angels wings,
Conquer all mysteries by rule and line,
Empty the haunted air and gnomed mine--
Unweave a rainbow.
(Keats, Lamia: II, 229-237)
Keats contrasted the truth of beauty and the life of the imagination with the cold dissecting hand of science. According to Ifor Evans (1954, Literature and Science) he had Newton in mind when he wrote these lines. Lamia In Greek mythology, had an affair with Zeus, and Hera punished her by stealing her children. In her grief she became a child-murdering daemon, and somehow personified the country of Libya.Do not all charms fly
At the mere touch of cold philosophy?
There was an awful rainbow once in heaven:
We know her woof, her texture; she is given
In the dull catalog of common things.
Philosophy will clip an Angels wings,
Conquer all mysteries by rule and line,
Empty the haunted air and gnomed mine--
Unweave a rainbow.
(Keats, Lamia: II, 229-237)
Keats contrasted the truth of beauty and the life of the imagination with the cold dissecting hand of science. According to Ifor Evans (1954, Literature and Science) he had Newton in mind when he wrote these lines. Lamia In Greek mythology, had an affair with Zeus, and Hera punished her by stealing her children. In her grief she became a child-murdering daemon, and somehow personified the country of Libya.
11. At first glance, science and Romanticism might seem at irreconcilable odds science advocates the rational, the empirical and the mental, Romanticism embraces the irrational, the metaphysical and the emotional.
Science represents realism and tough-mindedness; Romanticism, idealism and escapism.
But this supposed incongruence seems only so to our early 21st-century sensibilities. As EG Wilson points out, the poets and scientists of the early 19th century thought of themselves as soul mates.
EG Wilson, Professor of English at Wake Forest At first glance, science and Romanticism might seem at irreconcilable odds. Whereas science advocates the rational, the empirical and the mental, Romanticism embraces the irrational, the metaphysical and the emotional. Science represents realism and tough-mindedness; Romanticism, idealism and escapism. But this supposed incongruence seems only so to our early 21st-century sensibilities. As Wilson [EG Wilson, Professor of English at Wake Forest] points out, the poets and scientists of the early 19th century thought of themselves as soul mates. In 1807, Sir Humphrey Davy discovered chemical affinitymolecules combine and separate through electromagnetic attraction and repulsion, says Wilson, a Taylorsville, N.C., native who earned a masters degree in English from Wake Forest in 1990 and his doctorate from City University of New York in 1996. This finding suggested to Davy that matter is essentially not some dense stuff, but a field of galvanic force. Such a conjecture was tremendously exciting to certain Romantic writers, especially to Coleridge in England and to Emerson in America. Before the work of Davy and other early 19th-century scientists of electricity, most held the Newtonian view of the universe: matter is comprised of inert atoms moved about in a vast void by gravity in predictable paths and velocities. After Davy, scientists and poets alike began fervently to question this mechanistic cosmos, to envision material events as vital patterns of dynamic power. No longer dead, the universe, from stones to stars, came alive. Davy wrote poetry and was good friends with Coleridge, who attended Davys lectures and once claimed to be a so-so scientist, Wilson continues. In America, Emerson was deeply interested in science, especially the work of Davys protg and successor, Michael Farady. The poets and scientists of the day thought of their work as similar in kind, if different in degree. Both were seeking to solve the mystery of life. For the poets, one no longer needed to talk about the Christian soul or the platonic spirit in order to talk about the animating force of the universe. One could use scientific ideas as metaphors to talk about theological conceptsspirit could become electricity. Significantly, these translations of metaphysics to physics didnt reduce spiritmake it tame and predictable. On the contrary, the spiritual world became more interesting, complex, expansive. Wilsons three books explore various aspects of the affinities between science and Romanticism. In Romantic Turbulence: Chaos, Ecology, and American Space, for example, he demonstrates how American Romantics such as Emerson, Melville, Thoreau and Whitman fused the chaotic undercurrents of European Romanticism with the scientific discoveries of the day to forge a view of the universe not as a reflection of transcendent harmony or a system of predictable laws, but rather as a convergence of chaos and order, a polarized field. In his forthcoming book, The Spiritual History of Ice: Romantic Visions of Crystals, Glaciers and Poles, Wilson discusses how Romantic figures such as Coleridge, Poe, Percy and Mary Shelley, Emerson and Thoreau built upon the scientific discovery at the end of the 18th century that ice is not lifeless but vital, a crystalline revelation of vigorous powers. They challenged traditional notions of ice as waste and celebrated crystals, glaciers and the poles as disclosures of a holistic principle of being. Scientific inquiry had limits to the Romantics. Frankenstein remains a potent indictment of a certain form of science that tries to alter the natural order of things to conform to human desire, Wilson says. In Mary Shelleys novel, the title character violates the essential polarity between life and death. He represents what I call anthropocentric, or egocentric, sciencea mode of inquiry that wants to narrow nature to suit mans own designs and purposes. In suffering severe punishment for his transgression, Frankenstein represents the consequences of such hubris. The inherent tensions between literature and science ultimately became a rift. Following publication of Darwins The Origin of Species in 1859, science became increasingly positivistic, interested less in the intractable mysteries of life and more in prudent claims that could be empirically verified. To the Romantics, science was charged with wonder, Wilson says. It helped them shock people into new ways of seeinginto seeing the familiar in a strange light, the unfamiliar in an intimate glare. Now, it became less ambitious and more careful. There was no longer room in science for soul and spirit.( From a Wake Forest News release in 2002 - http://www.wfu.edu/wowf/2002/082902.html )At first glance, science and Romanticism might seem at irreconcilable odds. Whereas science advocates the rational, the empirical and the mental, Romanticism embraces the irrational, the metaphysical and the emotional. Science represents realism and tough-mindedness; Romanticism, idealism and escapism. But this supposed incongruence seems only so to our early 21st-century sensibilities. As Wilson [EG Wilson, Professor of English at Wake Forest] points out, the poets and scientists of the early 19th century thought of themselves as soul mates.
12. The idea of this special group of people slavishly following a protocol for discovery that disallowed personal experiences (of the divine, for example) grew once people had a word for these renegades.
In its broadest sense, science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") refers to any systematic knowledge or practice. In its more usual restricted sense, science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on the scientific method, as well as to the organized body of knowledge gained through such research.[1][2] This article focuses on the more restricted use of the word.
The word science comes through the Old French, and is derived from the Latin word scientia for knowledge, the nominal form of the verb scire, "to know". The Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root that yields scire is *skei-, meaning to "cut, separate, or discern". Other words from the same root include Sanskrit chyati, "he cuts off", Greek schizo, "I split" (hence English schism, schizophrenia), Latin scindo, "I split" (hence English rescind).[3] From the Middle Ages to the Enlightenment, science or scientia meant any systematic recorded knowledge.[4] Science therefore had the same sort of very broad meaning that philosophy had at that time. In other languages, including French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian, the word corresponding to science also carries this meaning.
Though the 19th century, many English speakers were increasingly differentiating science (meaning a combination of what we now term natural and biological sciences) from all other forms of knowledge in a variety of ways. The now-familiar expression scientific method, which refers to the prescriptive part of how to make discoveries in natural philosophy, was almost unused during the early part of the 19th century, but became widespread after the 1870s, though there was rarely totally agreement about just what it entailed.[6] The word "scientist," meant to refer to a systematically-working natural philosopher, (as opposed to an intuitive or empirically-minded one) was coined in 1833 by William Whewell.[7] Discussion of scientists as a special group of people who did science, even if their attributes were up for debate, grew in the last half of the 19th century.[6] Whatever people actually meant by these terms at first, they ultimately depicted science, in the narrow sense of the habitual use of the scientific method and the knowledge derived from it, as something deeply distinguished from all other realms of human endeavor.
(William Whewell (May 24, 1794 March 6, 1866) was an English polymath, scientist, Anglican priest, philosopher, theologian, and historian of science. His surname is pronounced "hew-el." : One of Whewell's greatest gifts to science was his wordsmithing. He often corresponded with many in his field and helped them come up with new terms for their discoveries. In fact, Whewell came up with the term scientist itself. (They had previously been known as "men of science"). Whewell also contributed the terms physicist, consilience, catastrophism, and uniformitarianism, amongst others; Whewell suggested the terms anode and cathode to Michael Faraday; this terminology persists in electrical technology to this day. )
William Whewell (d. 1866) polymath, scientist, theologian)
The idea of this special group of people slavishly following a protocol for discovery that disallowed personal experiences (of the divine, for example) grew once people had a word for these renegades.
In its broadest sense, science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") refers to any systematic knowledge or practice. In its more usual restricted sense, science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on the scientific method, as well as to the organized body of knowledge gained through such research.[1][2] This article focuses on the more restricted use of the word.
The word science comes through the Old French, and is derived from the Latin word scientia for knowledge, the nominal form of the verb scire, "to know". The Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root that yields scire is *skei-, meaning to "cut, separate, or discern". Other words from the same root include Sanskrit chyati, "he cuts off", Greek schizo, "I split" (hence English schism, schizophrenia), Latin scindo, "I split" (hence English rescind).[3] From the Middle Ages to the Enlightenment, science or scientia meant any systematic recorded knowledge.[4] Science therefore had the same sort of very broad meaning that philosophy had at that time. In other languages, including French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian, the word corresponding to science also carries this meaning.
Though the 19th century, many English speakers were increasingly differentiating science (meaning a combination of what we now term natural and biological sciences) from all other forms of knowledge in a variety of ways. The now-familiar expression scientific method, which refers to the prescriptive part of how to make discoveries in natural philosophy, was almost unused during the early part of the 19th century, but became widespread after the 1870s, though there was rarely totally agreement about just what it entailed.[6] The word "scientist," meant to refer to a systematically-working natural philosopher, (as opposed to an intuitive or empirically-minded one) was coined in 1833 by William Whewell.[7] Discussion of scientists as a special group of people who did science, even if their attributes were up for debate, grew in the last half of the 19th century.[6] Whatever people actually meant by these terms at first, they ultimately depicted science, in the narrow sense of the habitual use of the scientific method and the knowledge derived from it, as something deeply distinguished from all other realms of human endeavor.
(William Whewell (May 24, 1794 March 6, 1866) was an English polymath, scientist, Anglican priest, philosopher, theologian, and historian of science. His surname is pronounced "hew-el." : One of Whewell's greatest gifts to science was his wordsmithing. He often corresponded with many in his field and helped them come up with new terms for their discoveries. In fact, Whewell came up with the term scientist itself. (They had previously been known as "men of science"). Whewell also contributed the terms physicist, consilience, catastrophism, and uniformitarianism, amongst others; Whewell suggested the terms anode and cathode to Michael Faraday; this terminology persists in electrical technology to this day. )
William Whewell (d. 1866) polymath, scientist, theologian)
13. The idea of this special group of people slavishly following a protocol for discovery that disallowed personal experiences (of the divine, for example) grew once people had a word for these renegades.
In its broadest sense, science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") refers to any systematic knowledge or practice. In its more usual restricted sense, science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on the scientific method, as well as to the organized body of knowledge gained through such research.[1][2] This article focuses on the more restricted use of the word.
The word science comes through the Old French, and is derived from the Latin word scientia for knowledge, the nominal form of the verb scire, "to know". The Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root that yields scire is *skei-, meaning to "cut, separate, or discern". Other words from the same root include Sanskrit chyati, "he cuts off", Greek schizo, "I split" (hence English schism, schizophrenia), Latin scindo, "I split" (hence English rescind).[3] From the Middle Ages to the Enlightenment, science or scientia meant any systematic recorded knowledge.[4] Science therefore had the same sort of very broad meaning that philosophy had at that time. In other languages, including French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian, the word corresponding to science also carries this meaning.
Though the 19th century, many English speakers were increasingly differentiating science (meaning a combination of what we now term natural and biological sciences) from all other forms of knowledge in a variety of ways. The now-familiar expression scientific method, which refers to the prescriptive part of how to make discoveries in natural philosophy, was almost unused during the early part of the 19th century, but became widespread after the 1870s, though there was rarely totally agreement about just what it entailed.[6] The word "scientist," meant to refer to a systematically-working natural philosopher, (as opposed to an intuitive or empirically-minded one) was coined in 1833 by William Whewell.[7] Discussion of scientists as a special group of people who did science, even if their attributes were up for debate, grew in the last half of the 19th century.[6] Whatever people actually meant by these terms at first, they ultimately depicted science, in the narrow sense of the habitual use of the scientific method and the knowledge derived from it, as something deeply distinguished from all other realms of human endeavor.
(William Whewell (May 24, 1794 March 6, 1866) was an English polymath, scientist, Anglican priest, philosopher, theologian, and historian of science. His surname is pronounced "hew-el." : One of Whewell's greatest gifts to science was his wordsmithing. He often corresponded with many in his field and helped them come up with new terms for their discoveries. In fact, Whewell came up with the term scientist itself. (They had previously been known as "men of science"). Whewell also contributed the terms physicist, consilience, catastrophism, and uniformitarianism, amongst others; Whewell suggested the terms anode and cathode to Michael Faraday; this terminology persists in electrical technology to this day. )
William Whewell (d. 1866) polymath, scientist, theologian)
The idea of this special group of people slavishly following a protocol for discovery that disallowed personal experiences (of the divine, for example) grew once people had a word for these renegades.
In its broadest sense, science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") refers to any systematic knowledge or practice. In its more usual restricted sense, science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on the scientific method, as well as to the organized body of knowledge gained through such research.[1][2] This article focuses on the more restricted use of the word.
The word science comes through the Old French, and is derived from the Latin word scientia for knowledge, the nominal form of the verb scire, "to know". The Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root that yields scire is *skei-, meaning to "cut, separate, or discern". Other words from the same root include Sanskrit chyati, "he cuts off", Greek schizo, "I split" (hence English schism, schizophrenia), Latin scindo, "I split" (hence English rescind).[3] From the Middle Ages to the Enlightenment, science or scientia meant any systematic recorded knowledge.[4] Science therefore had the same sort of very broad meaning that philosophy had at that time. In other languages, including French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian, the word corresponding to science also carries this meaning.
Though the 19th century, many English speakers were increasingly differentiating science (meaning a combination of what we now term natural and biological sciences) from all other forms of knowledge in a variety of ways. The now-familiar expression scientific method, which refers to the prescriptive part of how to make discoveries in natural philosophy, was almost unused during the early part of the 19th century, but became widespread after the 1870s, though there was rarely totally agreement about just what it entailed.[6] The word "scientist," meant to refer to a systematically-working natural philosopher, (as opposed to an intuitive or empirically-minded one) was coined in 1833 by William Whewell.[7] Discussion of scientists as a special group of people who did science, even if their attributes were up for debate, grew in the last half of the 19th century.[6] Whatever people actually meant by these terms at first, they ultimately depicted science, in the narrow sense of the habitual use of the scientific method and the knowledge derived from it, as something deeply distinguished from all other realms of human endeavor.
(William Whewell (May 24, 1794 March 6, 1866) was an English polymath, scientist, Anglican priest, philosopher, theologian, and historian of science. His surname is pronounced "hew-el." : One of Whewell's greatest gifts to science was his wordsmithing. He often corresponded with many in his field and helped them come up with new terms for their discoveries. In fact, Whewell came up with the term scientist itself. (They had previously been known as "men of science"). Whewell also contributed the terms physicist, consilience, catastrophism, and uniformitarianism, amongst others; Whewell suggested the terms anode and cathode to Michael Faraday; this terminology persists in electrical technology to this day. )
William Whewell (d. 1866) polymath, scientist, theologian)
14. In the midst of change uncertainty can be intolerable (God does not play dice, Einstein would assert in the 20th C.)
But even William James would be uncertain about uncertainty:
1880: Philosophies of uncertainty cannot be acceptable; the general mind will fail to come to rest in their presence, and will seek for solutions of a more reassuring kind.
1895: Objective evidence and certitude are doubtless very fine ideals to play with, but where on this moonlit and dream-visited planet are they to be found? . . . We must go on experiencing and thinking over our experience, for only thus can our opinions grow more true. The climate of 19th century William James and the Culture of Uncertainty
Philosophies of uncertainty cannot be acceptable; the general mind will fail to come to rest in their presence, and will seek for solutions of a more reassuring kind. --WILLIAM JAMES, 1880
Objective evidence and certitude are doubtless very fine ideals to play with, but where on this moonlit and dream-visited planet are they to be found? . . . We must go on experiencing and thinking over our experience, for only thus can our opinions grow more true.WILLIAM JAMES, 1895
What place can uncertainty have in a cultural and intellectual study of mid-nineteenth-centuryAmerica? Well-educated, middle-class descendants of Europeans were the ones with social power; uncertainty seems irrelevant to their condition. In particular, William James's early years spanned an era of Jacksonian go-ahead spirit, westward expansion, Civil War ferocity, and Gilded Age aggressiveness. By most accounts, the United States was full of certainty, even reckless confidence. Even the controversies of the time were debated and fought between advocates and adversaries harboring wholesale confidence in the truth of their positions. Scratch at the surface of a Northern reformer for abolition or women's rights, a Southern supporter of the pecu liar institution, an evangelical minister, a writer or reader of popular novels, a-225-Questia Media America, Inc. www.questia.com Publication Information: Book Title: Science and Religion in the Era of William James. Contributors: Paul Jerome Croce - author. Publisher: University of North Carolina Press. Place of Publication: Chapel Hill, NC. Publication Year: 1995. Page Number: 225.
William James and theCulture of Uncertainty
Philosophies of uncertainty cannot be acceptable; the general mindwill fail to come to rest in their presence, and will seek forsolutions of a more reassuring kind. --WILLIAM JAMES, 1880
Objective evidence and certitude are doubtless very fine ideals to play with,but where on this moonlit and dream-visited planet are they to befound? . . . We must go on experiencing and thinking over our experience,for only thus can our opinions grow more true.WILLIAM JAMES, 1895
What place can uncertainty have in a cultural and intellectual study ofmid-nineteenth-centuryAmerica? Well-educated, middle-class descendants ofEuropeans were the ones with social power; uncertainty seems irrelevant totheir condition. In particular, William James's early years spanned an eraof Jacksonian go-ahead spirit, westward expansion, Civil War ferocity, andGilded Age aggressiveness. By most accounts, the United States was full ofcertainty, even reckless confidence. Even the controversies of the time weredebated and fought between advocates and adversaries harboring wholesaleconfidence in the truth of their positions. Scratch at the surface of a Northernreformer for abolition or women's rights, a Southern supporter of the peculiar institution, an evangelical minister, a writer or reader of popular novels, a-225-Questia Media America, Inc. www.questia.com
15. The mystery that energizes the spiritual impulse was about to be solved. And in this post-enlightenment atmosphere, something dark was cooking in America
Alien peoples and their religious faith with its allegiance to a foreign dictator were swarming our shores
The Irish famines led to about 1.5 million deaths; over 2 million fled; about 1.5 million came to America
for example, in 1847, 37,000 Irish showed up in a city of 115,000 Anglo-Saxon Protestants: Boston there was an enormous anti-Catholic sentiment The climate of 19th century Further, strange and possibly dangerous religions from across the sea were threatening America's sacred shores. The mystery that energizes the spiritual impulse was about to be solved. Further, strange and possibly dangerous religions from across the sea were threatening America's sacred shores. The mystery that energizes the spiritual impulse was about to be solved.
16. The Panic of 1873: sixty-five months during which
in New York, construction was cut in half, both in terms of number of new buildings and their value.
One hundred thousand people were thrown out of work, nearly one-quarter of the city's labor force.
Ten thousand homeless roamed the city's streets.
Those who still had work suffered a severe drop in wages, roughly 30 percent across the board. Socialism gained in popularity throughout the working-class neighborhoods of the city. The climate of 19th century Further, strange and possibly dangerous religions from across the sea were threatening America's sacred shores. The mystery that energizes the spiritual impulse was aboPanic of 1873 America experienced an economic boom following the end of the Civil War. Wall Street banks took part in financing a massive expansion of industry and the country's railroad system. Wages for both skilled and unskilled labor rose to their highest levels ever in the late 1860s and early 1870s. In 1873, however, the boom turned to bust. A number of U.S. banks had begun failing in April, but the Panic of 1873, as it was called, was set off by the failure of Jay Cooke & Co. on September 18th. It was one of the largest and most stable financial houses in the country (its projects included the transcontinental Northern Pacific Railroad). But it had recklessly overextended itself and issued millions of dollars of worthless stock. Numerous banks that had lent money too easily and other overextended financial institutions also failed. The New York Sock Exchange closed its doors for more than a week. The Panic marked the beginning of the longest period of economic contraction the nation had ever experienced - sixty-five months altogether. In New York, construction was cut in half, both in terms of number of new buildings and their value. One hundred thousand people were thrown out of work, nearly one-quarter of the city's labor force. Ten thousand homeless roamed the city's streets. Those who still had work suffered a severe drop in wages, roughly 30 percent across the board. Socialism gained in popularity throughout the working-class neighborhoods of the city. But the working class was hard-pressed by the decreased need for labor and government suppression of any labor organization. In January of 1874, laborers marched to demand that the city find them work. But the event culminated in a savage police attack on the marchers in Tompkins Square. Union membership in New York actually declined over the period, from 45,000 in 1873 to 5,000 in 1879. Government - federal, state, and local - generally took the side of employers over employees and did practically nothing to alleviate the hardship of the unemployed. It took more than five years for New York City and the nation to finally recover from the economic malaise.
American Social History Project, Who Built America? Working People and the Nation's Economy, Politics, Culture, and Society (New York, 1992)
Further, strange and possibly dangerous religions from across the sea were threatening America's sacred shores. The mystery that energizes the spiritual impulse was aboPanic of 1873America experienced an economic boom following the end of the Civil War. Wall Street banks took part in financing a massive expansion of industry and the country's railroad system. Wages for both skilled and unskilled labor rose to their highest levels ever in the late 1860s and early 1870s. In 1873, however, the boom turned to bust.
17. There was unprecedented and deeply resented Irish immigration Citation Information:Nast, Thomas, "The Ignorant VoteHonors are Easy" (Cartoon), Harper's Weekly, v. 20. N. 1041. New York: December 9, 1876. Courtesy of HarpWeek.
Further, strange and possibly dangerous religions from across the sea were threatening America's sacred shores. The mystery that energizes the spiritual impulse was about to be solved. Citation Information:Nast, Thomas, "The Ignorant VoteHonors are Easy" (Cartoon), Harper's Weekly, v. 20. N. 1041. New York: December 9, 1876. Courtesy of HarpWeek.
Further, strange and possibly dangerous religions from across the sea were threatening America's sacred shores. The mystery that energizes the spiritual impulse was about to be solved.
19. Fear of Catholicism grows The First Vatican Council (1870) formalized a long-standing tradition as the Doctrine of Infallibility.
To whom were the many new immigrants loyal? In Catholic theology, papal infallibility is the dogma that, by action of the Holy Spirit, the Pope is preserved from even the possibility of error[1] when he solemnly declares or promulgates to the Church a dogmatic teaching on faith or morals as being contained in divine revelation, or at least being intimately connected to divine revelation. For all such infallible teachings, the Holy Spirit also works through the body of the Church to ensure that the teaching will be received by all Catholics.
This doctrine was defined dogmatically in the First Vatican Council of 1870. According to Catholic theology, there are several concepts important to the understanding of infallible, divine revelation: Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Sacred Magisterium. The infallible teachings of the pope are part of the Sacred Magisterium, which also consists of ecumenical councils and the "ordinary and universal magisterium". In Catholic theology, papal infallibility is one of the channels of the infallibility of the Church. The infallible teachings of the pope must be based on, or at least not contradict, Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scripture. Papal infallibility does not signify that the pope is impeccable, i.e., that he is specially exempt from liability to sin.
According to The Complete Idiot's Guide to Understanding Catholicism: "In reality, the pope seldom uses his power of infallibility......rather than being some mystical power of the pope, infallibility means the church allows the office of the pope to be the ruling agent in deciding what will be accepted as formal beliefs in the church."[2] Since the 1870 solemn declaration of Papal Infallibility by Vatican I, this power has been used only once: in 1950 when Pius XII defined the Assumption of Mary as being an article of faith for Roman Catholics.
In Catholic theology, papal infallibility is the dogma that, by action of the Holy Spirit, the Pope is preserved from even the possibility of error[1] when he solemnly declares or promulgates to the Church a dogmatic teaching on faith or morals as being contained in divine revelation, or at least being intimately connected to divine revelation. For all such infallible teachings, the Holy Spirit also works through the body of the Church to ensure that the teaching will be received by all Catholics.
This doctrine was defined dogmatically in the First Vatican Council of 1870. According to Catholic theology, there are several concepts important to the understanding of infallible, divine revelation: Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Sacred Magisterium. The infallible teachings of the pope are part of the Sacred Magisterium, which also consists of ecumenical councils and the "ordinary and universal magisterium". In Catholic theology, papal infallibility is one of the channels of the infallibility of the Church. The infallible teachings of the pope must be based on, or at least not contradict, Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scripture. Papal infallibility does not signify that the pope is impeccable, i.e., that he is specially exempt from liability to sin.
According to The Complete Idiot's Guide to Understanding Catholicism: "In reality, the pope seldom uses his power of infallibility......rather than being some mystical power of the pope, infallibility means the church allows the office of the pope to be the ruling agent in deciding what will be accepted as formal beliefs in the church."[2] Since the 1870 solemn declaration of Papal Infallibility by Vatican I, this power has been used only once: in 1950 when Pius XII defined the Assumption of Mary as being an article of faith for Roman Catholics.
20. John William Draper
founder of NYU Medical School
First president of American Chemical Society
Believed in the positivism of Auguste Compte which held that civilization moves through stages of which science is the peak.
Spoke of the expansive force of human intellect and the compression arising from traditionary faith. John William Draper, a founder of NYU Medical School, wrote the "History of the Conflict between Religion and Science Chemist at NYU, First president of ACS 1860s published a history of intellectual development of Europe influenced by Comptes positivism (moving through intellectual stages up to science)
He loved the immutable laws governing everything science, culture, history
Asked to contribute to a series of popular books he wrote "A History of the conflict between Religion and Science (1874) it hit the jackpot
The expansive force of human intellect and the compression arising from traditionary faith.
His book according to Principe is absolutely wretched history for example
Interpretations by declaration
Comments quoted way out of context
St Augustine is ridiculed for saying the sky is stretched flat over the earth like a skin when in fact Augustine was quoting the Psalms as an example of how biblical interpreters must NOT accept the text particularly when it obviously conflicts with established knowledge
His real issue however was a long vitriolic attack on Catholicism! The corruption of Christianity into Romanism
For example, it is a law of nature that The human population should double every 25 years .. but in the 500 years from 1066 to the reformation, the population of England barely doubled because of Catholicism !! celibacy, clerical debauchery, accept of death from famine, disease, & lack of medical care all under the instruction of the pope.
Catholicism always had A bitter mortal animosity toward science.
1st Vatican Council.. criticized rationalism .. but they affirmed the limitations established by items of faith (eg triune nature of god)
Anti Catholicism anti immigration AND steeped in promises of scientific progress
Protestantism, on the other hand is the sister of science
Islam is the the Southern Reformation John William Draper, a founder of NYU Medical School, wrote the "History of the Conflict between Religion and Science Chemist at NYU, First president of ACS 1860s published a history of intellectual development of Europe influenced by Comptes positivism (moving through intellectual stages up to science)
He loved the immutable laws governing everything science, culture, history
Asked to contribute to a series of popular books he wrote "A History of the conflict between Religion and Science (1874) it hit the jackpot
The expansive force of human intellect and the compression arising from traditionary faith.
His book according to Principe is absolutely wretched history for example
Interpretations by declaration
Comments quoted way out of context
St Augustine is ridiculed for saying the sky is stretched flat over the earth like a skin when in fact Augustine was quoting the Psalms as an example of how biblical interpreters must NOT accept the text particularly when it obviously conflicts with established knowledge
His real issue however was a long vitriolic attack on Catholicism! The corruption of Christianity into Romanism
For example, it is a law of nature that The human population should double every 25 years .. but in the 500 years from 1066 to the reformation, the population of England barely doubled because of Catholicism !! celibacy, clerical debauchery, accept of death from famine, disease, & lack of medical care all under the instruction of the pope.
Catholicism always had A bitter mortal animosity toward science.
1st Vatican Council.. criticized rationalism .. but they affirmed the limitations established by items of faith (eg triune nature of god)
Anti Catholicism anti immigration AND steeped in promises of scientific progress
Protestantism, on the other hand is the sister of science
Islam is the the Southern Reformation
21. John William Draper
Wrote "History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874)
using his beloved immutable laws that governed almost everything science, culture, history-- in support of anti-Catholic sentiment.
For example, it was the Catholic church that frustrated the law of nature that human populations should double every 25 years. John William Draper, a founder of NYU Medical School, wrote the "History of the Conflict between Religion and Science Chemist at NYU, First president of ACS 1860s published a history of intellectual development of Europe influenced by Comptes positivism (moving through intellectual stages up to science)
He loved the immutable laws governing everything science, culture, history
Asked to contribute to a series of popular books he wrote "A History of the conflict between Religion and Science (1874) it hit the jackpot
The expansive force of human intellect and the compression arising from traditionary faith.
His book according to Principe is absolutely wretched history for example
Interpretations by declaration
Comments quoted way out of context
St Augustine is ridiculed for saying the sky is stretched flat over the earth like a skin when in fact Augustine was quoting the Psalms as an example of how biblical interpreters must NOT accept the text particularly when it obviously conflicts with established knowledge
His real issue however was a long vitriolic attack on Catholicism! The corruption of Christianity into Romanism
For example, it is a law of nature that The human population should double every 25 years .. but in the 500 years from 1066 to the reformation, the population of England barely doubled because of Catholicism !! celibacy, clerical debauchery, accept of death from famine, disease, & lack of medical care all under the instruction of the pope.
Catholicism always had A bitter mortal animosity toward science.
1st Vatican Council.. criticized rationalism .. but they affirmed the limitations established by items of faith (eg triune nature of god)
Anti Catholicism anti immigration AND steeped in promises of scientific progress
Protestantism, on the other hand is the sister of science
Islam is the the Southern Reformation John William Draper, a founder of NYU Medical School, wrote the "History of the Conflict between Religion and Science Chemist at NYU, First president of ACS 1860s published a history of intellectual development of Europe influenced by Comptes positivism (moving through intellectual stages up to science)
He loved the immutable laws governing everything science, culture, history
Asked to contribute to a series of popular books he wrote "A History of the conflict between Religion and Science (1874) it hit the jackpot
The expansive force of human intellect and the compression arising from traditionary faith.
His book according to Principe is absolutely wretched history for example
Interpretations by declaration
Comments quoted way out of context
St Augustine is ridiculed for saying the sky is stretched flat over the earth like a skin when in fact Augustine was quoting the Psalms as an example of how biblical interpreters must NOT accept the text particularly when it obviously conflicts with established knowledge
His real issue however was a long vitriolic attack on Catholicism! The corruption of Christianity into Romanism
For example, it is a law of nature that The human population should double every 25 years .. but in the 500 years from 1066 to the reformation, the population of England barely doubled because of Catholicism !! celibacy, clerical debauchery, accept of death from famine, disease, & lack of medical care all under the instruction of the pope.
Catholicism always had A bitter mortal animosity toward science.
1st Vatican Council.. criticized rationalism .. but they affirmed the limitations established by items of faith (eg triune nature of god)
Anti Catholicism anti immigration AND steeped in promises of scientific progress
Protestantism, on the other hand is the sister of science
Islam is the the Southern Reformation
22. John William Draper
Continually quotes authorities out of context most notably St Augustine
Spiraled into a vitriolic rant against Romanism
Regarded Protestantism as a sister of science and Islam, the Southern Reformation. John William Draper, a founder of NYU Medical School, wrote the "History of the Conflict between Religion and Science Chemist at NYU, First president of ACS 1860s published a history of intellectual development of Europe influenced by Comptes positivism (moving through intellectual stages up to science)
He loved the immutable laws governing everything science, culture, history
Asked to contribute to a series of popular books he wrote "A History of the conflict between Religion and Science (1874) it hit the jackpot
The expansive force of human intellect and the compression arising from traditionary faith.
His book according to Principe is absolutely wretched history for example
Interpretations by declaration
Comments quoted way out of context
St Augustine is ridiculed for saying the sky is stretched flat over the earth like a skin when in fact Augustine was quoting the Psalms as an example of how biblical interpreters must NOT accept the text particularly when it obviously conflicts with established knowledge
His real issue however was a long vitriolic attack on Catholicism! The corruption of Christianity into Romanism
For example, it is a law of nature that The human population should double every 25 years .. but in the 500 years from 1066 to the reformation, the population of England barely doubled because of Catholicism !! celibacy, clerical debauchery, accept of death from famine, disease, & lack of medical care all under the instruction of the pope.
Catholicism always had A bitter mortal animosity toward science.
1st Vatican Council.. criticized rationalism .. but they affirmed the limitations established by items of faith (eg triune nature of god)
Anti Catholicism anti immigration AND steeped in promises of scientific progress
Protestantism, on the other hand is the sister of science
Islam is the the Southern Reformation John William Draper, a founder of NYU Medical School, wrote the "History of the Conflict between Religion and Science Chemist at NYU, First president of ACS 1860s published a history of intellectual development of Europe influenced by Comptes positivism (moving through intellectual stages up to science)
He loved the immutable laws governing everything science, culture, history
Asked to contribute to a series of popular books he wrote "A History of the conflict between Religion and Science (1874) it hit the jackpot
The expansive force of human intellect and the compression arising from traditionary faith.
His book according to Principe is absolutely wretched history for example
Interpretations by declaration
Comments quoted way out of context
St Augustine is ridiculed for saying the sky is stretched flat over the earth like a skin when in fact Augustine was quoting the Psalms as an example of how biblical interpreters must NOT accept the text particularly when it obviously conflicts with established knowledge
His real issue however was a long vitriolic attack on Catholicism! The corruption of Christianity into Romanism
For example, it is a law of nature that The human population should double every 25 years .. but in the 500 years from 1066 to the reformation, the population of England barely doubled because of Catholicism !! celibacy, clerical debauchery, accept of death from famine, disease, & lack of medical care all under the instruction of the pope.
Catholicism always had A bitter mortal animosity toward science.
1st Vatican Council.. criticized rationalism .. but they affirmed the limitations established by items of faith (eg triune nature of god)
Anti Catholicism anti immigration AND steeped in promises of scientific progress
Protestantism, on the other hand is the sister of science
Islam is the the Southern Reformation
23. Andrew Dickson White
Historian, Founder of Cornell, the first major secular university in America
He hoped this would "an asylum for Sciencewhere truth shall be sought for truth's sake, not stretched or cut exactly to fit Revealed Religion."
Deeply hurt by attacks on him by the religious right for founding a secular university
24. Andrew Dickson White, 1985 Andrew Dickson White, actually was a historian one of the founders of America's first great secular university (Cornell) ,
He collected several short writings into a large two volume "History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom" (1896).
Seem more measured than Draper not as popular, but apparently It included lots of footnotes and looked unassailably scholarly.
An account of the ups and downs of amity between science & religion. They often seemed reconciled to each other ..
but in my copy of White, the reverberations between America and Scotland led to progressively more vicious attacks: Darwins defenders resorted to the Gospel of the Gutter, and the editor of The Christian urged frantically that the battle be set in array, and that men find out who is on the lords side and who is on the side of the devil and the monkeys. (White, Chap I part IV) Many theologians (particularly in England deplored the nature of the attacks, but Americans (in particular) love a good squabble.
White sought to defend his sanctuary for science from mindless dogmatism responding to vicious criticism of his having established a SECULAR university
So he set about proving how pernicious religion can be: he projected his Cornell experience onto all of history.
White got back, as only a scholar could, at the vicious attacks on him for his secular undertaking.
Historical accuracy not reliable
E.g., the idea that before Columbus people thought the world was flat. But the sphericity was well known in the 5th century BC but White (as well as Draper) found two obscure writers whose flat-earth ideas were regarded by these guys as more authoritative than every other author over a thousand years.
Collectivism an individuals views are taken as representative of a much larger group.
White even used a Washington Irving story about Columbus as historical evidence Andrew Dickson White, actually was a historian one of the founders of America's first great secular university (Cornell) ,
He collected several short writings into a large two volume "History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom" (1896).
Seem more measured than Draper not as popular, but apparently It included lots of footnotes and looked unassailably scholarly.
An account of the ups and downs of amity between science & religion. They often seemed reconciled to each other ..
but in my copy of White, the reverberations between America and Scotland led to progressively more vicious attacks: Darwins defenders resorted to the Gospel of the Gutter, and the editor of The Christian urged frantically that the battle be set in array, and that men find out who is on the lords side and who is on the side of the devil and the monkeys. (White, Chap I part IV) Many theologians (particularly in England deplored the nature of the attacks, but Americans (in particular) love a good squabble.
White sought to defend his sanctuary for science from mindless dogmatism responding to vicious criticism of his having established a SECULAR university
So he set about proving how pernicious religion can be: he projected his Cornell experience onto all of history.
White got back, as only a scholar could, at the vicious attacks on him for his secular undertaking.
Historical accuracy not reliable
E.g., the idea that before Columbus people thought the world was flat. But the sphericity was well known in the 5th century BC but White (as well as Draper) found two obscure writers whose flat-earth ideas were regarded by these guys as more authoritative than every other author over a thousand years.
Collectivism an individuals views are taken as representative of a much larger group.
White even used a Washington Irving story about Columbus as historical evidence
25. Andrew Dickson White, 1985 The Christian American Scientific Affiliation, in an address at Westmont College, blamed White for perpetuating a number of scientific myths, such as the idea that Christopher Columbus had to overcome widespread belief in a flat earth and that Charles Darwin's work was generally opposed by the religious authorities.[4]
White got back, as only a scholar could, at the vicious attacks on him for his secular undertaking.
Historical accuracy not reliable
E.g., the idea that before Columbus people thought the world was flat. But the sphericity was well known in the 5th century BC but White (as well as Draper) found two obscure writers whose flat-earth ideas were regarded by these guys as more authoritative than every other author over a thousand years.
Collectivism an individuals views are taken as representative of a much larger group.
White even used a Washington Irving story about Columbus as historical evidence The Christian American Scientific Affiliation, in an address at Westmont College, blamed White for perpetuating a number of scientific myths, such as the idea that Christopher Columbus had to overcome widespread belief in a flat earth and that Charles Darwin's work was generally opposed by the religious authorities.[4]
White got back, as only a scholar could, at the vicious attacks on him for his secular undertaking.
Historical accuracy not reliable
E.g., the idea that before Columbus people thought the world was flat. But the sphericity was well known in the 5th century BC but White (as well as Draper) found two obscure writers whose flat-earth ideas were regarded by these guys as more authoritative than every other author over a thousand years.
Collectivism an individuals views are taken as representative of a much larger group.
White even used a Washington Irving story about Columbus as historical evidence
26. Andrew Dickson White, 1985 The Christian American Scientific Affiliation, in an address at Westmont College, blamed White for perpetuating a number of scientific myths, such as the idea that Christopher Columbus had to overcome widespread belief in a flat earth and that Charles Darwin's work was generally opposed by the religious authorities.[4]
White got back, as only a scholar could, at the vicious attacks on him for his secular undertaking.
Historical accuracy not reliable
E.g., the idea that before Columbus people thought the world was flat. But the sphericity was well known in the 5th century BC but White (as well as Draper) found two obscure writers whose flat-earth ideas were regarded by these guys as more authoritative than every other author over a thousand years.
Collectivism an individuals views are taken as representative of a much larger group.
White even used a Washington Irving story about Columbus as historical evidence The Christian American Scientific Affiliation, in an address at Westmont College, blamed White for perpetuating a number of scientific myths, such as the idea that Christopher Columbus had to overcome widespread belief in a flat earth and that Charles Darwin's work was generally opposed by the religious authorities.[4]
White got back, as only a scholar could, at the vicious attacks on him for his secular undertaking.
Historical accuracy not reliable
E.g., the idea that before Columbus people thought the world was flat. But the sphericity was well known in the 5th century BC but White (as well as Draper) found two obscure writers whose flat-earth ideas were regarded by these guys as more authoritative than every other author over a thousand years.
Collectivism an individuals views are taken as representative of a much larger group.
White even used a Washington Irving story about Columbus as historical evidence
27. Drapers "History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874)
Whites "History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom" (1896)
Unacceptable by any reputable historian rife with well known fallacies and avoidable errors. Both these books are wretched history SCIENCE
Science, according to Herbert Spencer, is organized knowledge (1861) but it is not really a repository of endless facts and factoids it is a method, a living process embodied in all of us it is, in T.H. Huxleys view, "nothing but the expression of the necessary mode of working of the human mind"(1863). Einstein would agree: "Science, he said, is a refinement of everyday thinking."
(Herbert Spencer 18201903 English philosopher in Education (1861) ch. 2); Science is abstract. Sir William Dampier called it "the ordered knowledge of natural phenomena and the rational study of the relationship between the concepts in which these phenomena are expressed." (Beck, Modern Science and the Nature of Life, p 7)
(TH Huxley 1863."Our Knowledge of the Causes of the Phenomena of Organic Nature")
(Albert Einstein, PhysLINK.com Quotation, Week of April 5, 1999.)
THIS IS THE KEY FOR US!
All of our most exalted accomplishments of cognition or culture are arguably derived from much more modest beginnings Our capacity to speak follows a line of descent through the ages to the stress-evoked respiratory reflexes of earliest vertebrate ancestors; Our creativity itself is an element of the relentless pursuit of connections our brains seek to better represent the external world within us and the brains interconnections so essential for harmonious focused thought and actions (arguably, again, most mental dysfunctions can be laid to flawed, faulty, or wounded connections between the senses and the brain, the parts of the brain and between the brain and effective action)
The parts of our minds cannot act in isolation: "The senses cannot think. The understanding cannot see."
(Kant in CPR cited by Wechsler 1978:2 alternatively, "Perception without conception is blind, while conception without perception is empty." (Kant CPR 1978) [recalls Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. (Albert Einstein in Science, Philosophy and Religion: a Symposium (1941) ch. 13)]
SCIENCE in E.O. Wilsons view, neither a philosophy or a belief system. It is a combination of mental operations that has become increasingly the habit of educated peoples, a culture of illuminations hit upon be a fortunate turn of history that yielded the most effective way of learning about the real world ever conceived (1998:45)SCIENCE
Science, according to Herbert Spencer, is organized knowledge (1861) but it is not really a repository of endless facts and factoids it is a method, a living process embodied in all of us it is, in T.H. Huxleys view, "nothing but the expression of the necessary mode of working of the human mind"(1863). Einstein would agree: "Science, he said, is a refinement of everyday thinking."
(Herbert Spencer 18201903 English philosopher in Education (1861) ch. 2); Science is abstract. Sir William Dampier called it "the ordered knowledge of natural phenomena and the rational study of the relationship between the concepts in which these phenomena are expressed." (Beck, Modern Science and the Nature of Life, p 7)
(TH Huxley 1863."Our Knowledge of the Causes of the Phenomena of Organic Nature")
(Albert Einstein, PhysLINK.com Quotation, Week of April 5, 1999.)
THIS IS THE KEY FOR US!
All of our most exalted accomplishments of cognition or culture are arguably derived from much more modest beginnings Our capacity to speak follows a line of descent through the ages to the stress-evoked respiratory reflexes of earliest vertebrate ancestors; Our creativity itself is an element of the relentless pursuit of connections our brains seek to better represent the external world within us and the brains interconnections so essential for harmonious focused thought and actions (arguably, again, most mental dysfunctions can be laid to flawed, faulty, or wounded connections between the senses and the brain, the parts of the brain and between the brain and effective action)
The parts of our minds cannot act in isolation: "The senses cannot think. The understanding cannot see."
(Kant in CPR cited by Wechsler 1978:2 alternatively, "Perception without conception is blind, while conception without perception is empty." (Kant CPR 1978) [recalls Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. (Albert Einstein in Science, Philosophy and Religion: a Symposium (1941) ch. 13)]
SCIENCE in E.O. Wilsons view, neither a philosophy or a belief system. It is a combination of mental operations that has become increasingly the habit of educated peoples, a culture of illuminations hit upon be a fortunate turn of history that yielded the most effective way of learning about the real world ever conceived (1998:45)
28. In America, evolutionary theory is still viewed with doubt or suspicion But damage has been done SCIENCE
Science, according to Herbert Spencer, is organized knowledge (1861) but it is not really a repository of endless facts and factoids it is a method, a living process embodied in all of us it is, in T.H. Huxleys view, "nothing but the expression of the necessary mode of working of the human mind"(1863). Einstein would agree: "Science, he said, is a refinement of everyday thinking."
(Herbert Spencer 18201903 English philosopher in Education (1861) ch. 2); Science is abstract. Sir William Dampier called it "the ordered knowledge of natural phenomena and the rational study of the relationship between the concepts in which these phenomena are expressed." (Beck, Modern Science and the Nature of Life, p 7)
(TH Huxley 1863."Our Knowledge of the Causes of the Phenomena of Organic Nature")
(Albert Einstein, PhysLINK.com Quotation, Week of April 5, 1999.)
THIS IS THE KEY FOR US!
All of our most exalted accomplishments of cognition or culture are arguably derived from much more modest beginnings Our capacity to speak follows a line of descent through the ages to the stress-evoked respiratory reflexes of earliest vertebrate ancestors; Our creativity itself is an element of the relentless pursuit of connections our brains seek to better represent the external world within us and the brains interconnections so essential for harmonious focused thought and actions (arguably, again, most mental dysfunctions can be laid to flawed, faulty, or wounded connections between the senses and the brain, the parts of the brain and between the brain and effective action)
The parts of our minds cannot act in isolation: "The senses cannot think. The understanding cannot see."
(Kant in CPR cited by Wechsler 1978:2 alternatively, "Perception without conception is blind, while conception without perception is empty." (Kant CPR 1978) [recalls Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. (Albert Einstein in Science, Philosophy and Religion: a Symposium (1941) ch. 13)]
SCIENCE in E.O. Wilsons view, neither a philosophy or a belief system. It is a combination of mental operations that has become increasingly the habit of educated peoples, a culture of illuminations hit upon be a fortunate turn of history that yielded the most effective way of learning about the real world ever conceived (1998:45)SCIENCE
Science, according to Herbert Spencer, is organized knowledge (1861) but it is not really a repository of endless facts and factoids it is a method, a living process embodied in all of us it is, in T.H. Huxleys view, "nothing but the expression of the necessary mode of working of the human mind"(1863). Einstein would agree: "Science, he said, is a refinement of everyday thinking."
(Herbert Spencer 18201903 English philosopher in Education (1861) ch. 2); Science is abstract. Sir William Dampier called it "the ordered knowledge of natural phenomena and the rational study of the relationship between the concepts in which these phenomena are expressed." (Beck, Modern Science and the Nature of Life, p 7)
(TH Huxley 1863."Our Knowledge of the Causes of the Phenomena of Organic Nature")
(Albert Einstein, PhysLINK.com Quotation, Week of April 5, 1999.)
THIS IS THE KEY FOR US!
All of our most exalted accomplishments of cognition or culture are arguably derived from much more modest beginnings Our capacity to speak follows a line of descent through the ages to the stress-evoked respiratory reflexes of earliest vertebrate ancestors; Our creativity itself is an element of the relentless pursuit of connections our brains seek to better represent the external world within us and the brains interconnections so essential for harmonious focused thought and actions (arguably, again, most mental dysfunctions can be laid to flawed, faulty, or wounded connections between the senses and the brain, the parts of the brain and between the brain and effective action)
The parts of our minds cannot act in isolation: "The senses cannot think. The understanding cannot see."
(Kant in CPR cited by Wechsler 1978:2 alternatively, "Perception without conception is blind, while conception without perception is empty." (Kant CPR 1978) [recalls Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. (Albert Einstein in Science, Philosophy and Religion: a Symposium (1941) ch. 13)]
SCIENCE in E.O. Wilsons view, neither a philosophy or a belief system. It is a combination of mental operations that has become increasingly the habit of educated peoples, a culture of illuminations hit upon be a fortunate turn of history that yielded the most effective way of learning about the real world ever conceived (1998:45)
