The scientific revolution profoundly changed the ways in which people thought. It was difficult for many to accept this change. Today scientific ways of thinking are as accepted and taken for granted as traditional ways of thinking in the sixteenth century. What might a future change in the ways of thinking be like, and do you think such ways of thinking would be accepted without too much difficulty?
The main function of science as a sphere of human activity is to develop the theoretical systematization of objective knowledge of reality. Science includes both activities to obtain new knowledge and its result – the amount of knowledge that is the basis of the scientific picture of the world.
The immediate goal of science is the description, explanation and prediction of the processes and phenomena of reality, which are the subject of its study on the basis of the opening of its laws. The system of science can be divided into natural, human, social and technical sciences. Accordingly, the objects of study are the nature of science, the intangible aspects of human activity, society and the material aspects of human activity and society. (McClellan, 2006, pp79 – 82)
Science split from everyday knowledge in antiquity. For a long time, there was a process of accumulation of individual empirical facts. And in ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, India, the first signs of the formation of scientific knowledge appeared – ancient medicine, astrology, Mathematics. In ancient Greece and Rome, science involved more people, there were theories trying to explain the accumulated facts. However, ancient science is not based on experience and did not have an adequate methodology, leading to some variation of opinion on certain issues.
If science is seen as a collection of facts, theories and methods collected in the books, and then the scientists are people who more or less successfully contribute to the creation of this set. The development of science in this approach – is a gradual process in which facts, theories and methods are composed of a growing stock of achievements, scientific methodology and knowledge. (McClellan, 2006, p 80)
The history of science is thus a discipline, which captures this sequential growth, and the difficulties that have prevented the accumulation of knowledge. It follows that the historian, interested in the development of science, has set itself two main tasks. On the one hand, they must determine who and when discovered or invented every scientific fact, law and theory. On the other hand, they must describe and explain the presence of the mass errors, myths and prejudices that impede the rapid accumulation of modern scientific knowledge.
In the early Middle Ages religion greatly influenced the development of science. Was it constructive influence? In fact, during this period there were no new trends, new theories. There was the process of regress – the knowledge gained over the centuries was easily destroyed in the fire of the Alexandrian library. New knowledge and evidence are accumulating very slowly – the monasteries, where it was concentrated did not pay much attention to this.
In Renaissance and especially in modern times the situation in science was radically changed for the better. Science has really developed.
The interest in the phenomenon of science, the laws of its development is as old as the science itself. Since time immemorial, science was studied both theoretically and empirically. By the end of the XX-th century, the philosophical theory of scientific development is largely formed. However, due to its versatility and relevance of the questions of philosophy of science continue to engage the attention of philosophers and scientists of various specialties. (Taylor, 1963, p112)
Nowadays people got used to the fact that every day discovers something new for the world. And it is really so. Nature is changing and people need to be accustomed to the new ways of life. This makes people take revolutionary scientific discoveries as the norm of life. Religion has lost its impact on scientific thought for some time but now more and more questions of science are negatively criticized by religion – for example, these are the issues of abortions, euthanasia, cloning, and other issues in medicine.
The idea of any revolution is to destroy the old knowledge and to create a new theory that would be more appropriate for the world. To my mind, the peculiarity of the way of scientific thinking in the future will be the fact that we will not deny the old knowledge but we will master it and accumulate it.
Works cited
McClellan James E. Science and Technology in World History: An Introduction. The Johns Hopkins University Press; 2nd edition, 2006
Taylor F. Sherwood. A Short History of Science and Scientific Thought. W. W. Norton & Company, 1963