• 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. 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.

  2. The cult of Stalin and the purges of the 1930(TM)s were two aspects of ...

    Yezhov quickly arranged the arrest of all the leading political figures in the Soviet Union who were critical of Stalin.[6] During this purge, a 'tell tale' society was formed, encouraging people to denounce fellow citizens, creating mistrust among the nation.

  1. The storming of the BAstille was the most significant event in 1789

    The main changes which occurred during the period of the August Decrees were as follows; tithes abolished, financial & tax privileges connected to land or persons abolished, all citizens taxed equally, special privileges abolished, all citizens without distinction of birth were eligible for all offices.

  2. Consider David Starkey(TM)s and Francis Pryor(TM)s respective versions of the nature and extent of ...

    "It is a matter of the greatest glory to the tribes to lay waste, as widely as possible, the lands bordering their territory, thus making them uninhabitable. They regard it as the best proof of their valour that their neighbours are forced to withdraw from those lands and hardly anyone dares set foot there"1 Tacitus echoes these sentiments.

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

    Government by Terror provided a centralised system, which was very effective during times of great instability, but now the future of the Republic in France was more secure, many began to question the need for the brutal methods of the terror.

  2. 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.

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

    During the second half of the century, more economic progress was made with improvements in communication, education and agriculture, with the construction of a great railway system and the introduction of major canal schemes. The opening of the Suez Canal in 1869 increased trade with India, which took on a new significance.

  2. The events in India in 1856/7 were caused by the issue of the new ...

    The Indian people would of seen this as a direct insult to the way they run their economy and would of questioned what right the British had to take more money of them when they were doing all of the hard labour.

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