On 27th April TR claimed, as generally accepted, that the dawn of science occurred in the 16th century. That is a narrow, euro-centric view which was shown to be false by The alchemist on the following day with a few historical examples. But even that correction is, I believe, misleading. Science is an integral part of humanity’s response to its environment. From the very start of our ability to use our hands and minds humans have needed to manipulate the world in which they live and, in doing so, have studied and learnt the properties of the materials of that world. That is science. It has had a continuous evolution since then until its present astonishing ability to throw light on the workings of the world, both physical and mental.

The magical attempts to control the world started at the same time and was the precursor to modern day religion. It, also, has gone through an evolution but still retains evidence of its early beginnings. The semi-magical rites of the religious; their belief that biscuits and wine are somehow really body and blood are no more than racial memories of actual sacrifices; the gorgeous raiments which disguise the reality of our simple neighbours are no more than the evolved decorations of the witch-doctors.

If people do not try to understand the long evolution of to-day’s science and religion, they disarm themselves in understanding the role that those activities play in our present-day lives.

Hi John Warren,

This is what I actaully wrote;

'It is generally accepted by historians that the dawn of science in Europe began in the sixteenth century with the Polish astronomer Mikolaj Kopernik (Nicholas Copernicus).

It goes without saying that science has been practised across many cultures but it is also true that science has ascendended to its greatest heights under the nurture of Western civilisation.'

That is, European science took off in the sixteenth century. I did not discount other cultures at all. Indeed, European science from the Renaissance period is really an extension of science as practiced by the Byzantine Empire. And of course the Byzantines learnt from Muslim scientists who, in turn, had borrowed heavily from ancient Greek scientists.

John Warren,
You prefer to believe Roman Catholic doctrine applied to what Jesus said. This is not what Jesus said. He was alive in body with blood coursing through his veins when he instuted the new covenant. What was in the glass was wine and what was on the plate was unleavened bread with no magical properties.

In any sense it only became his blood and his body when he absorbed it. The whole picture created by their drinking wine and eating bread was to remind the disciples every time they shared wine and bread together to remember the covenant he instituted to forgive sinners by his death. When you hold up a picture of yourself you can say, "this is me" does not make it magically you. What was commonplace to the disciples drinking and eating was to become a constant reminder they were forgiven. The elements involved in their action was merely a reminder and had no magical properties.


Quote, "The semi-magical rites of the religious; their belief that biscuits and wine are somehow really body and blood are no more than racial memories of actual sacrifices; the gorgeous raiments which disguise the reality of our simple neighbours are no more than the evolved decorations of the witch-doctors."

There is a world of difference between technology and natural science. All cultures have technology, they all manipulate matter for their own purposes. Science is the formation of theories from testable data. It is directed towards how things are. Science therefore did arise as TR wrote with Copernicus in the 16th century.

Philo, again you display the true expression of monotheism. Can't cope with fact, so resort to abuse and damnation. People resort to rage, because they've nothing else to support their fallacies. Philo, read the true stories of how monotheists, always approach new science and technology. Even today, they jump on anything that may debunk their dictates.

“Science is the formation of theories from testable data.”

The Woomera, Boomerang, display “formation of theories from testable data”. As does a wheel, the formula for the volume of a sphere. What would you call the development of multi stage rockets, navigation, compasses. Non testable data, but formulated by the inferior intelligence of non monotheists, barbarians as they were described by monotheism.

Chinese invented psychics, engineering, astrology, mathematics, meteorology, not science. You persist in dismissing fact, replacing it with illusion, continuing to dupe yourselves with these infantile, fictitious statements. Your constant denial of reality in an attempt to change what is, shows how insecure your minds are.

Sells article reads like a child trying to prove the fairies they saw in the garden, were real and not just shadows. Monotheism's all about shadows, nothing real.

If your belief is the expression of a modern verifiable mental positive, prove it, don't resort to claiming a past, which isn't true, except within your minds. How irrational your belief is, especially when you fail to answer many questions or provide testable data, for any of your claims.

Peter again makes a very narrow interpretation. Why? Just ignorance or insecurity?

We sometimes should start with our best information by trying to forget about the philosophical history of a problem. Just remind ourselves of what we know for a fact. Well, this is what I came up with ..... "the what", "the how" and "the why" from our earliest evolving identity.

Art is creation in the material universe that claims purposeful actions have causal efficacy. "the what"
Science is investigation in the material universe that claims purposeful actions can describe a causal "how".
Philosophy is investigation in the material universe that claims purposeful actions can describe a causal "why".

We don't need to believe that, with the advent of consciousness, we can now step outside evolution, go under it, rise above it, or stop it.... all our actions are evolutionary. We are all artists, we are all scientists and we are all philosophers. Long before the 16th century people everywhere would have asked the "how" question and concerned themselves with cause and effect investigations. It's mind boggling stooopidity to believe otherwise but I guess this is "how" these teddy viruses can disable their hosts.