Lars-Göran Johansson - Philosophy of Science for Scientists

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Lars-Gran Johansson 1

(1)

Keywords

And which of the gods was it that set them on to quarrel? It was the son of Jove and Leto; for he was angry with the king and sent a pestilence upon the host to plague the people, because the son of Atreus had dishonoured Chryses, his priest. Now Chryses had come to the ships of the Achaeans to free his daughter, and had brought with him a great ransom: moreover he bore in his hand the sceptre of Apollo wreathed with a suppliants wreath and he besought the Achaeans, but most of all the two sons of Atreus, who were their chiefs.

Homer: Iliad

Only a short moments contemplation shows us that science plays an enormous role in modern western societies. Scientific achievements have improved quality of life for billions of people in many ways. On the other hand, in certain respects, scientific advancements have worsened our quality of life. In addition, scientific advancement has often come at the expense of the rest of nature. In fact, some would even argue that science causes more harm than good, an opinion which I deem absurd. In any case, everyone can agree that science has greatly influenced the course of life all over the world.

From a global perspective, the evolution of science, and the consequent transformation of society, is a unique process. Throughout the ages, many societies have attained high levels of cultural development and organization (streets and roads, irrigation, educational institutions, organized postal service, formal justice systems, etc.). Yet, for the most part, modern western societies were the first to develop systems that saved large portions of its population from starvation and lengthened the average lifespan. Natural questions one might wish to ask in the light of these phenomena are how this societal change began, why it began in Western Europe, and why it began when it did?

Most would agree that these questions regard a profound changea true revolutionthat is considered the most significant historical development since the invention of agriculture. One can distinguish two somewhat distinct processes in this revolution: (i) the scientific revolution, which is usually placed in the period 15501650 A.D. and (ii) the industrial revolution, which began in England in the 1700s. The connection between these two revolutions is a controversial issue: some think that the industrial revolution was, for the most part, independent of the science of the day, while others think that a pertinent precondition for this process is the evolution of science and the so-called scientific perspective .

That the industrial transformation of western societies in the last hundred years is largely a result of scientific developments is undisputed. However, there is a question as to the role played by scientific insights in the beginning of the industrial transformation. In other words, we may ask, when did science begin to gain industrial and economic importance? Without taking a definite stance to this question, one can point at Sadi Carnot s (17961832) studies concerning the effectiveness of steam engines as a clear example of a scientific study, which was not founded on pragmatic demands, and yet had direct technical relevance. In his famous book Reflections on the Motive Power of Fire (1824) Carnot discusses the effectiveness of the steam engine, starting from purely theoretical principles. Guided by his insights, one could immediately introduce substantial improvements in the efficiency of steam engines. A crucial step was Carnots introduction of the concept of a quantitative measure of heat, Calorie . The previous long-lived idea that heat was a substance was replaced by the conception of heat as a quantitative property and the successful use of Carnots theory convinced people that this new conception was correct.

However, the scientific revolution started much earlier at around the middle of the 1500s in northern Italy, England, and Holland, the commercial centres of the time. Why then and in those areas? What are the causes of the scientific revolution? These questions are not only of historical interest! Many developing countries are now quickly attempting to embrace scientific and technological achievements with the kind assistance of humanitarian an U.N. organizations. However, the results of these endeavours are varied and sometimes discouraging. Thus there is anecdotal evidence that we lack sufficient understanding of the essential aspects of this process of transition.

In all likelihood, a wide range of circumstances is required for scientific thinking to emerge in a society and be applied in economic and industrial contexts. Among these circumstances one may distinguish between external and internal factors. External factors include, but are not limited to, religious, economical and political factors, and they act in fairly obvious ways as external constraints on our societys intellectual development. Internal factors include theories of knowledge, world-views, and norms of argumentation, which are, by and large, inherited. The ideas and concepts inherited from ancient thinkers is a factor that I shall argue actively contributed to the scientific revolution gaining momentum during the renaissance in Western Europe. We must keep in mind that many cultures have preceded ours in history; and yet, none of them achieved a similar breakthrough in scientific thinking. Which components of this ancient heritage were significant, and what was lacking from those earlier cultures whose absence prevented them from developing an active science?

As every history must begin somewhere, and as the germ of science is clearly gleaned in ancient Greece, let us begin this brief study of the historical preconditions of science there. To fully appreciate ancient Greek efforts towards scientific thinking, one would have to consider and discuss a great many things, but I shall here limit myself to four ideas that have proven particularly significant. I do not dare argue that these four ideas are the most significant as regards the evolution of scientific thinking, only that they are important. The four ideas are (1) the Ionian natural philosophers way of explaining nature, (2) the emphasis on rational argumentation, (3) Aristotles introduction of the concept of logical validity, and (4) Euclids axiomatic mathematics.

Thales thought that the underlying substrate, or principle, that which is responsible for the change in all things, is water. This is perhaps not so strange an idea, since all biological processes require water, and all living things contain large amounts of water. Thales perhaps reached this conclusion by noticing that a living organism requires a large amount of water for its survival, and similarly, when it dies it releases a great deal of water.