• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

How far do you agree that the impetus (momentum, thrust) of science experienced in Europe between 1500 and 1700 was indeed a revolution?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

How far do you agree that the impetus (momentum, thrust) of science experienced in Europe between 1500 and 1700 was indeed a revolution? The scientific revolution refers to the period between the 16th to 18th centuries in Europe, during the period of the Renaissance, where there was a large change in the field of science. It was started when many ancient texts were discovered after the fall of Constantinople, and together with the invention of printing, Europe experiences a revitalisation of scientific research. Defining a revolution as a dramatic and fundamental change, I do agree that this impetus of science was in fact a scientific revolution, since there was a significant change in scientists' approach to science, along with the change of fundamental ideas in science. The main reason why the impetus of science can be considered to be a revolution is because of the drastic change in the approach to science, or in the emergence of empiricism, which refers to scientific methodology most widely accepted in the modern context. It is a fundamental shift in the scientific method since prior to this period, the Aristotelian approach to obtaining science was to observe natural phenomena and based on deductive reasoning, form conclusions. It was only during the 16th century, that a scientists and philosopher named Francis Bacon specifically penned the empirical tradition. Thus the nature of obtaining scientific knowledge changed to a method where proper data and evidence obtained was used in the context of an experiment to form conclusions. ...read more.

Middle

It can be seen that these discoveries that have been proven to be true based on modern technology, are not only further developments in science, but actually fundamental changes in the widely accepted ideas. Such mindset shifts mark a major change during the period, uprooting many ideas that were originally thought to be true by the Greeks, thus showing that the period was truly a revolution. However, it can also be said that the impetus of science was not truly a revolution based on the fact that many scientists used the knowledge that was written down in the ancient texts by the Greek. This brings in the argument that while there was significant change in the ideas, many of the ideas were brought about by either adding to what was already understood, or using the original knowledge as a framework for critiquing and thus come up with new ideas, thus the argument that there is actually no significant change, but a review and continuity of earlier known knowledge. In many cases, scientists of the revolution had read the ancient antecedents of their own ideas, and adapted them to their own use. For example, it is accepted that Copernicus followed the outline and method used by Ptolemy, and adapted the geocentric model of the Maragheh in a heliocentric context when constructing his model of the universe. Newton had also admitted in a revised edition of his Principia, that his laws of gravity and his first law of motion were adapted from the writings of other historical figures. ...read more.

Conclusion

In this way, the origin of the ideas, as long as the new idea is significantly different from the original (flawed) understanding, becomes irrelevant. Even as the two perspectives are in conflict if using the extent of change in knowledge as a factor, the primary factor, I believe, that can be used to justify that the period was indeed a revolution is the emergence of empiricism. It is difficult to fully justify the extent at which specific ideas and findings during the period could be considered revolutionary, but it is easy to see that during the period, the fundamental method or approach to science was changed, or least used by scientists to an extent never seen in European science before the scientific revolution. It is on the basis that the philosophy and methodology of science itself has changed, that we can consider the period as revolutionary to the practice of science. In fact, empiricism, what we know now more as the scientific method, has been become so well accepted by modern institutions that we can begin to doubt the extent at which the people who developed ideas and obtained knowledge of the natural world before the rise of empiricism, could be considered to be truly practicing science. As such, this paradigm shift is the crucial factor is enabling us to understand that the impetus of science was indeed a scientific revolution, for the change was science in itself, not just scientific knowledge. ?? ?? ?? ?? Chow Keng Ji (3A) ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Other Historical Periods section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Other Historical Periods essays

  1. Early Modern Europe and the Scientific Revolution

    People in the middle ages, followed the teaching of Ptolemy. The Ptolemaic system put the earth in the center of everything, as opposed to orbiting the sun. This was accepted by all of Europe, and especially the Christian church.

  2. To what extent was the Northern Renaissance influenced by the Italian Renaissance

    The Italian artists and artistic techniques had a profound influence upon the artists of the Northern Renaissance - the merchants brought back a great deal of paintings and techniques that the northern artists could employ along with them actually travelling to Italy in order to get this experience from the artists first-hand.

  1. Robespierre fell when the Terror had outlived its usefulness- How far do you agree ...

    Austria who had previously threatened to invade France, had been pushed back by French forces and was not a threat to France for the time being. The value of the assignat was rising by 1793, stabilising France's finances, Food supplies to major cities and towns had been stabilised by the

  2. Russian History. A period of great achievement To what extent do you agree with ...

    After aiding Sophia in May, Khovansky used his influence with the troops to force her court to flee the Moscow Kremlin and seek refuge in the Troitse-Sergiyeva Lavra. The Streltsy rebels, who instigated the rebellion, hoped to depose Sophia

  1. How far do you agree that by 1763 the ties between Britain and the ...

    The ties between Britain and the American colonies were, at least on the surface, without fault by 1763. The colonies enjoyed the benefits of the Mercantilist system which helped them to develop. Also Britain and the colonies had successfully united to defeat the French.

  2. In the context of India in the 1840s to 1947, how far can independence ...

    Home Rule for example, effectively started in Ireland in 1870, and it became dominant in British politics when Gladstone was converted to it in the 1880?s, this growth of a nationalist movement could be seen with hindsight, to have influenced the emerging Indian intelligentsia.

  1. Isolated, backwards and weak how far do you agree with this assessment of Russia ...

    These natural obstacles were however, reinforced by manmade ones. Throughout the 17th century there were no permanent Russian diplomatic missions stationed in the capitals of western and central Europe. Instead such missions were sent only intermittently often when some crisis or turn of events made them necessary and it was

  2. Discuss the impact of religious change on European society.

    In 1800-1810, many eastern European countries were transferred to France and men were selected into the French army. (http://members.aol.com/RAToepfer/webdoc7x.htm) The Holy Roman Empire sent troops in the defense of Catholicism in the Empire. Many clashes resulted with more death and destruction.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work