= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
hairyfigment comments on How Many LHC Failures Is Too Many? - All
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (130)
But Newton didn't propose a religious method for science, which is my point. Did you think I meant that the popes turned Dante atheist? What they did was give him a desire for a secular ruler and an "almost messianic sense of the imperial role".
That sort of thinking may have given rise to Descartes' science fiction, so to speak - secular aspirations which go beyond even a New Order of the Ages. So there are a few possible prerequisites for a scientific method. As for someone else writing one down, maybe; what we observe is that the best early formulation came from a brilliant freak.
Why do you think that Newtons proposal of his method of science had something to do with desire for a secular ruler?
Why do you think Newton's focus on new observations/experiments came from Cartesian ontology, when Newton doesn't wholly buy that ontology?
I'm saying the popes inadvertently created a separate concept of secular aspirations - often opposed to religious authorities, though not to God if he turns out to exist. This "imperial role" business is arguably a rival form of the idea, though Newton did in fact work for the Crown.
My main source is lecture series towards which I linked above. The Newtonian worldview is presented as the lecture that follows after the one I linked.
At the time the Crown was the head of the church in England.