Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Leonardo
General
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 778
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Islamic culture and European Renaissance Posted: 29-Mar-2006 at 16:07 |
Originally posted by Beylerbeyi
Don't push it, mate. Unlike you I am not claiming I am an expert because I read one book on the subject. Maybe you should read other books before making up your mind.
|
I don't claim either, but I have read more than one book on the subject
Edited by Leonardo
|
|
Beylerbeyi
Chieftain
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-Mar-2006 at 15:58 |
Don't push it, mate. Unlike you I am not claiming I am an expert because I read one book on the subject. Maybe you should read other books before making up your mind.
Edited by Beylerbeyi
|
|
Leonardo
General
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 778
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-Mar-2006 at 15:47 |
No. That's why I called them philosophers. |
So you are not up-to-date
I would have if I had the time. |
This is lame excuse
There may be instances, but general character of Hellenistic 'natural philosophy' (proto-science) lacks experimentation. |
This proofs that you don't know what are you talking about .
In fact, the hellenistic one was not a "natural philosophy" but, on the contrary, in many instances it was against natural philosophy, in particular against the natural philosophy of Aristoteles (this is well explained in the book of Russo ...).
I am not sure what you consider 'experiments'. I am not really an expert on this era (or the Islamic one) but Hipparchus was an astronomer, wasn't he? What experiment did he do I wonder? Observation and modelling are not experimenting. |
You are right, Hipparchus was mainly an astronomer and one of the biggest ever lived. But he performed also some experiments in the field of gravitational Physics. Unfortunely all his works but one are lost and what we know about his scientific researches derives from secundary sources. In particular we know from the Greek philosopher Philoponus (who lived centuries after Hipparchus) that Hipparchus anticipated G. Galilei in his researches on falling bodies.
For more informations you have to read the book of Russo
Edited by Leonardo
|
|
Beylerbeyi
Chieftain
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-Mar-2006 at 15:04 |
Were there "scientists" in the modern sense of the term in ancient times? |
No. That's why I called them philosophers.
I can't sum up Russo's book now, you have to read it if you are interested in this matter . |
I would have if I had the time.
Surely his thesis is controversial and not generally full accepted yet, but the simple statement that there was some kind of experimental science in hellenistic world is far less controversial. |
There may be instances, but general character of Hellenistic 'natural philosophy' (proto-science) lacks experimentation.
Nota bene: when we talk of hellenistic world the term "hellenistic" is used in a cultural not ethnic sense. There were "hellenistic" scientists from all over hellenistic kingdoms and from any ethnical group. |
Yes, I use the term in the same way.
Finally this is a very short and incomplete list of hellenistic scientists well known to have performed some kind of experiments: Herophilus and Erasistratus in medicine, Archimedes, Hipparchus and Ctesibius in Phisics, Hero in Optics. |
I am not sure what you consider 'experiments'. I am not really an expert on this era (or the Islamic one) but Hipparchus was an astronomer, wasn't he? What experiment did he do I wonder? Observation and modelling are not experimenting.
|
|
Degredado
Consul
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Portugal
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 366
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-Mar-2006 at 12:31 |
For those of you who believe that the Crusades had any importance in transmitting knowledge from the east to the west, I should say that some historians completely reject that: Franks and Saracens were segregated to a certain extent. The only thing the crusaders brought was new ways to make castles, and that was mostly due to their own experiences. As for the importance of Corduba...it certainly didn't influence the western part of the Peninsula, which remained a backwater.
|
Vou votar nas putas. Estou farto de votar nos filhos delas
|
|
Leonardo
General
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 778
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-Mar-2006 at 08:02 |
Originally posted by Beylerbeyi
Well, science as we know it was born in the 17th-19th century in the West, not in 300 BC in the Hellenistic world. The word 'science' was used in the 19th century for the first time. Modern scientific method was perfected a bit before that time, but there is not in 300 BC or 1300 AD.
As to Greeks and experiments, I don't know of any Greek philosopher who made experiments (as opposed to observations or model building). Care to enlighten me?
|
The "philosophers", both ancient and modern, generally don't perform experiments, so you are searching in the wrong place
Were there "scientists" in the modern sense of the term in ancient times? Lucio Russo, in his cited book, brings a huge documentation in support of his statement that the science, as we call it also today, was born in hellenistic world, more or less in 300 B.C. and it ended a first time with the fall of the last hellenistic kingdoms, more ore less in 0 B.C.
I can't sum up Russo's book now, you have to read it if you are interested in this matter .
Surely his thesis is controversial and not generally full accepted yet, but the simple statement that there was some kind of experimental science in hellenistic world is far less controversial.
Nota bene: when we talk of hellenistic world the term "hellenistic" is used in a cultural not ethnic sense. There were "hellenistic" scientists from all over hellenistic kingdoms and from any ethnical group.
Finally this is a very short and incomplete list of hellenistic scientists well known to have performed some kind of experiments: Herophilus and Erasistratus in medicine, Archimedes, Hipparchus and Ctesibius in Phisics, Hero in Optics.
Edited by Leonardo
|
|
Beylerbeyi
Chieftain
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Mar-2006 at 17:13 |
Well, science as we know it was born in the 17th-19th century in the West, not in 300 BC in the Hellenistic world. The word 'science' was used in the 19th century for the first time. Modern scientific method was perfected a bit before that time, but there is not in 300 BC or 1300 AD.
As to Greeks and experiments, I don't know of any Greek philosopher who made experiments (as opposed to observations or model building). Care to enlighten me?
|
|
Leonardo
General
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 778
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Mar-2006 at 16:13 |
Originally posted by Beylerbeyi
Islamic civilisation has advanced sciences quite a bit. It was in no way 'just a preserver'.
Western orientalists argued for centuries that ancient Greeks, invented everything, partly because they learned about those things from Greek sources, and partly because they were desperate to 'prove' 'Western' superiority. This attitude is still alive in the West.
Ancient Greeks have indeed advanced the sciences, but they have taken a vast amount of knowledge from older civilisations, particularly Egypt. Same thing with Islam, it has taken a lot from the Greeks and Persia (and others), but it also added its own contribution on top.
One very important contribution is the use of experimentation by Islamic scientists. Ancient Greeks considered experiments lowly. Physical work was for slaves, whereas philosophers were just thinkers. Islamic scientists actually conducted experiments to test their theories. That is a very important step towards modern scientific method.
Many of Islamic (or Chinese, for that matter) contributions are simply not known by Western historians. For instance, a friend of mine has this history of science book, a big, shiny, new reference book from a respectable source. I was looking at it and randomly I came across the claim that the circulation of blood was discovered by Harvey, in the 17th century (or was it 18th?). But I know that it was being taught in Syrian medrassas in the 11th century...
Islamic countries (or China) do not have the academic capabilities of the West, they don't know their own history that well. This may change in time. Until that time, take Western claims of 'discovery' with a pinch of salt.
|
I have to say that: first your post is not strictly on topic and second that your statement that there was no experimental science in hellenistic times is simply false. I might recommend you to read the book of a Italian scientist and scholar, Lucio Russo, The Forgotten Revolution, How Science Was Born in 300 BC and Why it Had to Be Reborn:
Edited by Leonardo
|
|
Halevi
Colonel
Joined: 16-Feb-2006
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 584
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Mar-2006 at 13:18 |
Originally posted by Beylerbeyi
...One very important contribution is the use of
experimentation by Islamic scientists. Ancient Greeks considered
experiments lowly. Physical work was for slaves,
whereas philosophers were just thinkers. Islamic scientists
actually conducted experiments to test their theories. That
is a very important step towards modern scientific method.... |
Hmm... this theme sounds vaguely familiar ; )
|
"Your country ain't your blood. Remember that." -Santino Corelone
|
|
Beylerbeyi
Chieftain
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Mar-2006 at 12:53 |
Islamic civilisation has advanced sciences quite a bit. It was in no way 'just a preserver'.
Western orientalists argued for centuries that ancient Greeks, invented everything, partly because they learned about those things from Greek sources, and partly because they were desperate to 'prove' 'Western' superiority. This attitude is still alive in the West.
Ancient Greeks have indeed advanced the sciences, but they have taken a vast amount of knowledge from older civilisations, particularly Egypt. Same thing with Islam, it has taken a lot from the Greeks and Persia (and others), but it also added its own contribution on top.
One very important contribution is the use of experimentation by Islamic scientists. Ancient Greeks considered experiments lowly. Physical work was for slaves, whereas philosophers were just thinkers. Islamic scientists actually conducted experiments to test their theories. That is a very important step towards modern scientific method.
Many of Islamic (or Chinese, for that matter) contributions are simply not known by Western historians. For instance, a friend of mine has this history of science book, a big, shiny, new reference book from a respectable source. I was looking at it and randomly I came across the claim that the circulation of blood was discovered by Harvey, in the 17th century (or was it 18th?). But I know that it was being taught in Syrian medrassas in the 11th century...
Islamic countries (or China) do not have the academic capabilities of the West, they don't know their own history that well. This may change in time. Until that time, take Western claims of 'discovery' with a pinch of salt.
|
|
Leonardo
General
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 778
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Mar-2006 at 08:02 |
Perhaps you didn't read my posts .
I remember you some facts:
1. In Italy (the first place in Europe where started Renaissance) Renaissance was not a scientific but humanistic (= arts and literature) stuff. Here not Arab but ancient Greek-roman models.
2. In Italian Renaissance there was a reaction against medioeval "science", that is against the philosophy more influenced by Arab scholars.
3. The real scientific revolution in Europe started at least a century after the end of Renaissance and had very little to do with any Arab influence.
|
|
Moustafa Pasha
Samurai
Joined: 19-Jun-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 133
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Mar-2006 at 21:55 |
All that is written above about the contribution of Islamic sciences is true. Nevertheless I would like to add that the transfer of knowledge occurred through universities of Arab Spain which triggred the renaissance in Europe.
http://web.umr.edu/~msaumr/reference/articles/science/contri bution.html
Edited by Moustafa Pasha
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Feb-2006 at 13:07 |
Yes, too concise. I am no expert in Cordoba but I would say that there
wasn't such an intelectual flow via Spain. Spanish Chrstians were
mostly frontier barbarians that weren't very interested in
illustration. The Cordobese Caliphate wasn't so outstanding either. I'd
say that it was more during the time of the Taifa kingdoms, when the
many emirs of illustrated tendencies favored the arrival of many
scientists and artists to al Andalus - nevertheless their effort was
truncated by the Almoravid fundamentalist intervention.
My impression is that the Crusades and the contact that standing
outposts such as Acre, Cyprus and the Genovese bases in the Black Sea
what brought some science and innovation from the Islamic sphere and
China via the silk road. Still is was the fall of Byzantium what truly
propelled Italian Renaissance because of the many educated refugees.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Leonardo
General
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 778
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Feb-2006 at 14:47 |
Originally posted by Zagros
One word: Cordoba.
|
Too concise
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Feb-2006 at 13:25 |
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Feb-2006 at 13:17 |
Also it's sometimes exaggerated the role of Islam in scientific
developement. Islam acted as an active reservoir and transmissor of
science, specially in the fields of maths, astronomy, alchemy and
medicine, with many scholars adding to the diferent sources (Greek,
Indian, Chinese, pre-Islamic Persian) that fed that civilization. But I
feel that the role of Islam, as that of Rome before wasn't so much to
invent as to preserve, transmit and fuse.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Leonardo
General
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 778
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Feb-2006 at 12:36 |
Don't misunderstand Renaissance with Scientific Revolution, they aren't the same thing. Especially Italian Renaissance ("Rinascimento") had a lot to do with humanistic, not scientific, field: arts and literature.
Here the Arabs had little to offer (of course, they had something ...) in comparison with classical greek-roman models. The arabic scientific influence was by far harder during Middle Ages. In Renaissance there was a reaction against medieval scholasticism influenced above all by arabian scholars. I can remember the tirades of Petrarch, sometimes called "the first modern man", against the arabian philosophers and their Aristotelism.
The Scientific Revolution started when the Renaissance had already ended (at least in Italy) and was determined by the complex internal dynamics of western european societies.
Edited by Leonardo
|
|
Kapikulu
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Feb-2006 at 11:48 |
Certainly, during the Crusades and many other different points of interaction, Europeans took a lot from Muslims, such as gunpowder, compass etc., and all those knowledge learned had been a pioneer towards the European Renaissance of the future.So, the effect of Islamic world in the Renaissance can't be neglected.
The Muslim world, who were far away in areas like science,culture,philosophy and many other subjects once upon a time, later unfortunately missed the European Renaissance and couldn't proceed in its development, it is a sad fact either.
|
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;
A Strange Orhan Veli
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Feb-2006 at 05:14 |
Ok, I'll accept that they may not have been invented by the Arabs. That
sounds logical. It doesn't however diminsh the great input of the Arabs.
I suspect there probably was a scientific revolution in the 8th-10th
centarys, but alot of what was discovered was lost in 1258, and the
rest has suffered 500 years of plagurism by others claiming the
invention for themselves.
|
|
Leonardo
General
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 778
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Feb-2006 at 04:45 |
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
I have an excellent DVD which talks about this, unfortunately it does go into a whole heap of detail because there is so much.
Algebra, Optics, Chemisty (Al-Chemy), are all topics that were invented by Arabs An Enormous amount of our knowledge of Chemisty until the 20th centuary discoveries were originally invented by muslims.
Physics, Engineering Are often credited to Arabs, but I have suspions that the concept was around before and the Arabs just added to enormously
Base 10 number system Initally Indian, but the Arabs extensively used it and passed it to the west (hindu-arabic number system) This includes 0
Medicine Geometry Astronomy Biology, Botany Are all fields that were enourmously added to by muslims from various countries.
Nearly all pre-Newtonian Science was invented or developed by Muslims.
Thats off the top of my head, I haven't even begun to do justice to the topic.
ADDITION: (Oh and lets no forget the whole concept of modern science is a muslim one. God running the universe on scientific laws is mentioned in the Qu'ran) The DVD quotes a famous French science historian whose name I forget saying that there was a fundamental shift in scientific thinking in the 7th century. The historian never says What happened in the 7th century (it was the birth of Islam).
|
I disagree a lot with you.
Just a sample:
Algebra, Optics and Chemistry were not invented by the Arabs. They existed before. Ancient mesopotamians knew algebric algorithms for solving first and second grade equations. The foundations of Optics were set by greek mathematicians (Euclid, Ptolemy, Hero) and "Chemistry" probably derives from the greek "chemeia".
Arabs and other muslim peoples developed a lot the sciences they got from previous civilizations but they never ignited a scientific revolution comparable with the European one (Copernic, Galilei, Kepler, Newton).
|
|