Simply put, the Scientific Revolution marked the emergence of modern science. It marked the beginning of moving away from speculation and to experimenting to prove theories. People like Galileo and Newton made significant advancements in the fields of astronomy, physics, and mathematics. However with advancements came confrontations.
The biggest opponent against the Scientific Revolution was the Church. Since Aristotle's inaccurate theories were recovered in the Middle Ages, they had been incorporated into religious beliefs. For instance, Aristotle believed Earth was the center of the universe. Surrounding the Earth were spheres each in a perfect position. Beyond the tenth sphere was Heaven. This model of the universe not only gave reasonable and believable explanations but it also gave both God and humans a specific place in the universe and put human beings at the center. When this belief was questioned by Copernicus and Galileo, the church opposed them. Galileo was even put on trial for stating the earth was not the center but rather the sun. Though Galileo was put on trial by Catholics, Protestants tended to be more opposed to the Scientific Revolution because they took the Bible more seriously.
The Scientific Revolution was very important. As stated previously, scientists during this time began testing theories instead of just thinking about them. They came up with logical and actual proof and evidence for things occurring. Furthermore, the Scientific Revolution changed the way people looked at the world. The conflict between religion and science began more prominent. People wondered what was right: religion or science? How could both coexist? This problem would only continue into the future and to modern day where debates are still continuing.
This leads us to the big conclusion: Why the Scientific Revolution happened and not the Renaissance.
1.) The Renaissance took Greek and Roman ideas. The Scientific Revolution looked at old ideas and made their own.
Look at Renaissance sculptures, architecture, and paintings. They are all pretty similar to Greek and Roman art. How can something exist, if it does not have its own ideas. The Scientific Revolution looked at old ideas and made their own. For instance, they looked at Aristotle's layout of the universe, realized it was wrong, came up with a new one, and proved it with evidence.
2.) Though in both movements only a few people participated, the Scientific Revolution effected or would effect everyone.
Unlike the Renaissance, where only few people participated and only few were effected, during the Scientific Revolution a few people participated but many were effected. Because the Scientific Revolution lead to the ongoing question of faith vs. science, it not only effected people then but continued to in the future.
3.) If the Renaissance did happen, why did they not discover the flaws in science?
People look at the Renaissance as being this time of enlightenment. But what did it really accomplish. They studied the classics but failed to improve upon them. Furthermore, individualism probably kept people in the mind set of Earth being the center of the universe (individualism--> people are awesome--> people are center of universe). So if people did not push new ideas, did it really occur? The Scientific Revolution, however, pushed for new ideas proving it occurred.
4.) No one fought against the Renaissance.
Think about it. Was there anyone who actually did not support the Renaissance? Was there any one who purposely fought against its ideas? No. Even the church did not have a problem with it. How could this be? All through history, there has never been an event or a movement that everyone has agreed upon. So logically if no one fought against the Renaissance that must mean it did not happen. However, many people opposed the Scientific Revolution because it challenged the way of thinking, it brought forth new ideas, and effected people. The Scientific Revolution did most defiantly occur.
In conclusion the Renaissance did not happen and the Scientific Revolution did. And if you still disagree....
No comments:
Post a Comment