STM+Week+02

Response on “ [|Michael Fowler’s Page on Aristotle] ”-

Michael Fowler’s discussion on the theories and sciences that Aristotle pursued was an interesting read, despite the fact that I have studied Aristotle previously on numerous occasions throughout my years of education. The opening paragraphs about former philosophers and contemporaries of Aristotle brings to light the fact that society during this time was becoming more and more advanced and the pursuit of science was becoming and more and more accepted and common way of living one’s life. While previously, mankind was focused on the trials and difficulties of living from one day to the next, a number of people, starting with the upper classes but moving into the lower sects of society, were able to break away from the tasks of immediate survival or pleasure and focus on unlocking the secrets of the world, even if they didn’t pose any immediate benefit to any one’s future. These men and women became members of the ver growing ranks of scientists whose contribution we could not have created the modern we live in without. This mental and philisophical revolution generated untold wealth's of new "Human Knowledge" that could not have been comprehended by past generations.

Another point that was made clear during this passage was mankind’s gullibility and naivety when it came down to knowledge. Even today, we take the words of other people as pure fact just because they may seem intelligent or have a trusting personality. Despite Aristotle’s intensive study into the realms of biology, mathematics, and other sciences, he was severely lacking in concrete evidence within the realm of physics in almost every respect. Instead of applying his usual diligent exploration and experimentation, as he did in other fields, Aristotle defined his understanding of physics in an almost completely philosophical manner. Instead of testing his theories out or even observing nature occurrences with any attention, Aristotle created a system of physics that on the surface seemed "sound" and “Elegant”, but failed to hold any truth when put up against even the simplest of tests. His theory that “Heavier things fall faster, the speed being proportional to the weight.” is actually so simple to prove wrong that it is taught and demonstrated in schools going back as early as second grade, at least in my own experience. Despite this incredible lack of scrutiny and evidence, Aristotle’s outlook on physics and several other matters, such as planetary motion, were taken as fact and taught by generations before someone, such as Galileo, had the mind to step back and say “Hmmm, I don’t feel like that’s true, let me quickly test that out!” Using this as an example, we should not take any kind of knowledge from any source as set in stone until we have seen proof that this idea is set on a stable ground of experiments, observations, and the like and even then we should be completely open to that idea being wrong, because new discoveries are being made every day by technology that hasn’t existed previously and in some cases dumb luck that reveals “facts” unseen by previous observers.