On May 3, 12:21 pm, Robert Henry <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, personally I think its earliest interest in Neo-Platonism would > have served her ends better. For Platonism and Neo-Platonism speak of > another world just as much as this one.
You are missing the point. The real problem with the adoption of the Greeks into the Church was that it was not done in the spirit of free inquiry. When Acquinas produced his so-called medieval synthesis it was done with the church condemning over 200 statements of Aristotle's at the same time - on pain of death. But even when the Neo-Platonists were working they too used the findings not as a springboard for new knowledge but as a series of dogmatic statements. Plato has much less in it to assist the growth of science. I would like to hear what you think it might have been! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
