Re: A Thread for Random Musings
Prompted by Zornwil, although I've been thinking about this the last few days.
------------------------------
Is science the be all and end all of human knowledge?
It seems that way most of the time, but some of the greatest contributions to the Occident have been from theories, not maths-science.
To me both theories, eg philosophical theories, as opposed to writing reality into the language of mathematics, complement each other for the betterment of Occidental society and cultural extelligence rather than the opposite. Maths-science has dominated the last few centuries and giving credit where it is due has led to the enormous increase in the standard of living. But why stop here, I fear that science as tool maybe leading us astray if it doesn't receive help from philosophy.
Contrasting these two approaches philosophical theories with math-science, the figureheads I've chosen are Giordano Bruno and Issac Newton. One was a philosopher who was without the aid of mathematics and experimentation and the other used maths and experimentation to invent calculus, devise the 3 Laws of Motion, 'invent' gravity, and his book on opitics is well acknowledged.
It was suggested by Ramon Mendoza PhD, that Bruno answered these questions:
Is the universe finite or infinite?; Is the human mind interrelated ?; Is there one or countless universes?; and is there life on other planets? Furthermore, Mendoza asserts that Bruno was the true founder of modern cosmology whose writings included sub-atomic particles what Bruno called 'minima' to the acentric labyrinth of the cosmos. Quoting Mendoza: "Also Einstein question whether God had any choice in creating the universe had already been asked by Bruno...and answered negatively!" Bruno accomplished these things, and much much more 400 years ago...if only we listened! Mendoza quotes Bruno: "If Copernicus is the dawn, then I am the sun of the New Era". (Yes I'm an unashamed Bruno fan, if it wasn't obvious, he is my favourite philosopher.)
To be fair, Mendoza has his critics, but I'm unfamiliar with them and this is beyond the scope of my point: The uniting of philosophical theory with maths-science would catapult the Occident to a level that would seem unimaginable as a jet airline would be to a peasant living during the time of da Vinci and Michelangelo.
Whether it be dialogue, a treatise, enquiry or a critique, philosophical theory still has a lot to contribute to Occidental shrine to Sophia. Science may constantly leave her flowers but philosophy built her shine to begin with.