Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
Mon Nov 23, 2015, 12:48 PM Nov 2015

How religion and science broke up:

I'll focus on Europe for this one.

------------------------------------

The philosophers of Ancient Greece are famous for the many hypotheses they produced on the workings of the world, on the human... So why did they eventually fade away?

Because the greek philosophers were looking for explanations that "make sense". If they had made the jump to doing experiments to test their hypotheses, they would have invented something like the scientific method.
Back in 500 BC.
But they never made the jump to experiments.

Why?

Because it would have violated two subconscious philosophies of theirs:
1. The defining approach to any knowledge back then (and up until the Age of Enlightenment) was that the old ways are best. Anything new and recent is just a poor and corrupted copy of a glorious past full of power, magic and wisdom. Doubting and testing the wisdom of the past was simply considered nonsensical.
2. They had no concept of men being able to use the laws of nature for his own end. The laws of nature were part of the divine realm. The human had no contact to them. Setting up an experiment would have been futile, because your apparatus wouldn't have been able to take advantage of the laws of nature anyways. (All things happen because God wants them to happen.)





It was Ramon Llull, a 13th century mystician, who developed the concept of men being able to control the laws of nature. This was the real treasure hidden in his obscure esoteric teachings.
Ramon Llull inspired a whole avalanche of alchemistic tomes (that were later mistakenly attributed to him).

The Renaissance was the "Age of Rebirth". The Catholic Church had overplayed its hand. It had turned life and worship into ever-expanding lists and doctrines and regulations. People got disappointed. But, isn't the present merely a poor and corrupted copy of the true wisdom of the ancient past?
What if, instead of the bothersome teachings of the Catholic Church, they were able to go back to the original teachings of ancient Christianity?

At this point, a dating-mistake became important. In the 2nd to 3rd century AD, greek Christians had written theological literature on a divine figure, "Hermes Trismegistos". They sought to combine religious knowledge of Christianity, Ancient Greece and Ancient Egypt. But a dating-mistake later lead readers to believe that these books were about an actual mage named "Hermes Trismegistos" who had lived in Ancient Egypt and these were his magical tomes...

Scholars read the books of Hermeticism, believed them to be from many millenia before the coming of Christ... and found hints at Christianity all over the place!
Truly, if someone were trying to go back to the true beginnings of Christianity, this would be the sources to use!

With Hermeticism, magic entered the realm of scholars. Llull had planted the seed that there were laws of nature independent from the divine. And now the "ancient truth" of the hermetic teachings presented an opportunity to access the laws of nature by magical means.
The christian scholar became the mage.

Magic wasn't without controversy, as there was much written about the danger that the powers one might call on might actually be demons. But these warnings were rare: Hermes Trismegistos was a part of the judeo-christian heritage!

What followed was a flurry of research to identify the laws of nature and tap into them. If only one were to combine the religious and magical knowledge in the right fashion, one would become a wielder of magic. This was done in secrecy and obscurity. (This is how "hermetic" became a byword for "sealed-off".)
This is where the idea of a "Renaissance-scholar" comes from: The idea that a scholar were able to understand the whole universe by memorizing the underlying structure of the universe.

Though all those "magical laws of nature" that were proposed "made sense", none of them were able to actually produce "magic". Giordano Bruno was the most prominent of this lot. (The Inquisition wasn't happy that his proposals to return to the true version of Christianity included turning Christianity into a sun-worshiping religion like in Ancient Egypt.)

Magic had failed to produce tangible results.
Where to go next?
At this point, advances in mathematics came to aid, for example by Leibniz. The attitude of the scholars changed once more. A new hunger emerged, a hunger for quantitative solutions rather than qualitative solutions, a hunger for explanations that can be backed up by cold, hard calculations.
Llull's concept of accessible laws of nature, combined with the tradition of the Renaissance-mages to look for them with a method of trial-and-error, combined with a mathematical treatment of the results.
The mage of the Renaissance-era became the scientist of the Enlightenment-era.

10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How religion and science broke up: (Original Post) DetlefK Nov 2015 OP
The math needed was difficult before place holding arabic numbers. Festivito Nov 2015 #1
The Roman conquest of the Greek world may have something to do struggle4progress Nov 2015 #2
Or it might not have. Act_of_Reparation Nov 2015 #3
You might ask yourself what it meant to win or lose a war struggle4progress Nov 2015 #4
I don't have to ask myself anything. Act_of_Reparation Nov 2015 #5
Your choice struggle4progress Nov 2015 #6
Yes, I choose scholasticism over imagination. Act_of_Reparation Nov 2015 #7
Choosing scholasticism would in some ways be an odd stance from you: struggle4progress Nov 2015 #8
Yes, yes, yes. I used the wrong word. Act_of_Reparation Nov 2015 #10
Imagine an online flame-war. DetlefK Nov 2015 #9

Festivito

(13,452 posts)
1. The math needed was difficult before place holding arabic numbers.
Mon Nov 23, 2015, 01:51 PM
Nov 2015

Giving rise to the concept of zero and eventually accuracy enhancing decimal fractions and on and on.

1. Every era has persons stuck in the past.
2. And people who do not want their current beliefs challenged.

Fears of what we do not understand still plague us. The simplicity of number expression may be a greater part of the transition to science than the intransigence of a power few whose numerical representations needed for that jump made seeing that jump too hard -- leading to fear, leading to intransigence.

struggle4progress

(118,295 posts)
2. The Roman conquest of the Greek world may have something to do
Mon Nov 23, 2015, 03:39 PM
Nov 2015

with the end of Greek philosophical productivity

struggle4progress

(118,295 posts)
4. You might ask yourself what it meant to win or lose a war
Mon Nov 23, 2015, 04:42 PM
Nov 2015

Wars are costly, and the victors repaid themselves in various manners, including slaves and tribute

Act_of_Reparation

(9,116 posts)
5. I don't have to ask myself anything.
Mon Nov 23, 2015, 05:52 PM
Nov 2015

The Roman conquest of the Greek peninsula is fairly well documented, by both contemporaneous and modern scholars.

struggle4progress

(118,295 posts)
8. Choosing scholasticism would in some ways be an odd stance from you:
Tue Nov 24, 2015, 01:04 AM
Nov 2015
... There are perhaps six main characteristics of Scholasticism:

An acceptance of the prevailing Catholic orthodoxy.

Within this orthodoxy, an acceptance of Aristotle as a greater thinker than Plato.

The recognition that Aristotle and Plato disagreed about the notion of universals, and that this was a vital question to resolve.

Giving prominence to dialectical thinking and syllogistic reasoning.

An acceptance of the distinction between "natural" and "revealed" theology.

A tendency to dispute everything at great length and in minute detail, often involving word-play ...


http://www.philosophybasics.com/movements_scholasticism.html

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
9. Imagine an online flame-war.
Tue Nov 24, 2015, 09:27 AM
Nov 2015

Why did no new greek philosophers show up over time?
Why did the tradition of philosophers end?


Simple:
Because they didn't have anything new to offer. Just more theories that sound nice and "make sense", just like all the theories that came before and sounded nice and "made sense".
And even if they were to come up with new explanations, the attitude was that the old explanations are better than the new explanations.


Imagine an online flame-war.
Each side is dealing out opinions and claims that "make sense".
But nobody is actually fact-checking anything that is said.
Why would the Romans care about a flame-war between greek philosophers?
Especially if the flame-war is between young upstarts who are no match for the wisdom of ancient times anyways?

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»How religion and science ...