The Rise of Science

Chapter Six from Book Three, Part One of Bertrand Russell's "The History Of Western Philosophy" (1945).

[@zacharycat603]

To say Kepler was without much in the way of genius is ridiculous. If discovering three laws of planetary motion was so simple why hadn't anyone else discovered even one of them in all the thousands of years that the planets were known? Russell gives the main reason, that no other astronomer in history had thought to abandon circular orbits and to realize that orbits were elliptical. Kepler also had the mathematical skill to prove his theory could accurately predict the motions of the planets. Either Kepler's reputation has increased since Russell's Day (the Kepler Space Telescope for example) or Russell, writing during Ww2, was reluctant to praise any German scientist or philosopher.

[@marissatrevino1515]

The main reason, that I see, why anyone hadn’t discovered simple things would have to be that ,during that time, no one appreciated/ supported science or big thinking and in fact fear/ hate that person for thinking out of the box because it’s change and people fear change because it makes them uncomfortable. Much like how it is now. Everyone hates doctors and scientist because they aren’t telling them what they want to hear.

[@hansolafsen77]

I believe it's because Russell has a strong bias against any speculative or platonic reasoning. Kepler came up with the laws peu a peu, after having started with theological, magical, platonic reasoning and he adhered thise views for all of his life.

[@xxcoopcoopxx]

I got dumber from this post.

[@smkxodnwbwkdns8369]

@@marissatrevino1515 that’s not true at all. There’s a long history of states, sovereigns, patrons, and colleges supporting science much like today. The only danger is when science contradicts theology which at the time the earth at center of universe was a prevailing theological argument. Today the church is very supportive of science and in fact Catholic Church is one of the leading producers of astronomical science. Your other point is wrong too. Who doesn’t want to hear what scientists and doctors say? I say it’s generally true average people feel uncomfortable around intellectual culture of any stripe from science to philosophy. I think what you are referring to however is not science but rather alt-right bigotry about genders correlating with biological sex. That’s a misunderstanding as biologists going back to Aristotle never denied gender constructs. You are conflating genders with sex. Or perhaps racism which again science has long not been supportive of.

[@benquinneyiii7941]

Russell proved that 1+1=2

[@samsunnaharmitu129]

Subtitle is needed

[@kwijung]

"tee-koh brah"? That can't be the right pronunciation. I always thought it was "tie-ko bra-hee"

[@AudioPervert1]

Dont get caught up in pronunciation fascism. it's anyway a latin name.

[@benquinneyiii7941]

Lucky

[@Earthweep]

I believe that the rise of science and technology was predicted in Chapter 13 of the Revelation to John in the Bible. Look at this chapter as being like a political cartoon, except that it satirizes our science and technology rather than nations or politics. If I'm right, the world is destined to be ruled by a great scientist...or else a talking AI (artificial intelligence) that personifies all man's science.

[@dochmbi]

I hope that robots and Ai will take over the world

[@archezwei1729]

Alois Irlmaier saw it coming