I am working on a book on 17C & early 18th C economists. At the time there 
was a wierd mix of science & superstition. Astrologers were seen as 
scientists, especially because some of their observations were useful for 
navigators.  Earlier John Dee, the court astrologer, was a major figure in 
developing mathematics and astrology.

The history of medicine has numerous "scientific" practices that turned out 
to be hokum, but haven't some of the "primitive" procedures turned out to 
have merit?

That seems to be what Jim meant by a critical approach to science?
 -- 
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
michaelperelman.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to