An interesting point made by Gleick: When Newton said 'I do not make an hypothesis' )or something to that effect -- my Latin is a bit rusty ;-) he was not (as sometimes said) rejecting the use of hypotheses in general in science. In fact, he was talking in a specific context. The best explanation that he could think of for the laws of motion was the action of a deity. Since he knew that this was not an acceptable SCIENTIFIC explanation, he basically said 'I'm not going there' -- rather than accepting a nonscientific hypothesis, he would hold judgement until an acceptable scientific one became available. He was very careful to keep his science and religion separate.
Paul Brandon Emeritus Professor of Psychology Minnesota State University, Mankato paul.bran...@mnsu.edu On Sep 17, 2010, at 11:18 AM, Marc Carter wrote: > > I'm not showing an anti-religion bias at all. The fact that Newton felt his > greatest work was his commentary on the Bible in no wise shows that > thoughtful theologians are responsible for the development of science -- it > merely shows that Newton was religious (he was also, btw, something of an > occultist). > > The original contention was that "thoughtful theologians" were responsible > for modern science, not that the collection of people who invented science > were religious. I don't doubt that they were. Galileo, Brahe, Bacon, > Kepler, Copernicus, Newton: all of them were religious, but they weren't > theologians. > > Reflection on the world and the human condition led to the development of > science, not reflection on the existence or characteristics of gods -- which > is what theologians do. > > Read Gleick or Michael White on Newton. His Christianity didn't make him a > scientist, and his commentary on the Bible didn't make him a theologian. > > From: Louis E. Schmier [mailto:lschm...@valdosta.edu] > Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 9:26 AM > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) > Subject: Re: [tips] Galileo Was Wrong? > > > As an historian, I'll attest that Michael Smith is right. Some of you are > showing your anti-religion bias. Newton, for example, felt that his greatest > work was not the Mathamatica Principia, but his commentary on the Bible. So, > if you think Michael's explanation is "shallow," for starters, I would send > you to Majorie Nicolson, Breaking the Circle and Moutain Gloom, Mountain > Glory, Alexandre Koyre, From the Closed World to the Infinite Universe, and > Arthur Koestler, Sleepwalkers. > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=4939 or send a blank email to leave-4939-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
