12/8/23
In order to change my understanding of the history of science, this course first changed my understanding of science itself. Historically, it makes sense that scientists and labs wouldn’t have just suddenly come into being, that there would be a buildup, but the articles we read, especially at the beginning of the course, made it clear how far back the subject goes. Alchemy, while considered by some to be a precursor to different disciplines of science, such as medical and chemical, still seems a subject steeped with magic and superstition.
That change, the mindset shift from believing in magic to seeing it as baseless and impractical, is part of the history of science. It is such a fundamental aspect, and yet something you may not think about until studying further. When we learned about it in one of our first classes, alchemy as a subject seemed so far from the science we know today. Even something like astronomy, which I now consider to be one of the earliest forms of recorded science, seemed to only be relevant in the aspect of recording. The phases of venus, of the moon, the calendars, they were made in stone, in clay, and still we see those phases and stars today. There is a distinct connection between the past and present, and one of those connections is just above our heads.
Merchant and the article from Cunningham and Williams really brings these concepts into the light. First, Merchant explains the shift from organic to a more mechanical framework of thought in regards to earth, science, and what humans can achieve. It seems now so obvious that humans would snatch up and modify and create anything, that destruction is inevitable for whatever the human race touches. Maybe it wasn’t always this way, however, and humankind had respect for that which they could not replenish. Cunningham and Williams were also able to explain a specific aspect that confused me even throughout this class: why some people just couldn’t accept things we now regard as true. Why did people put Galileo on trial? Why couldn’t they have just listened to him? It’s because that would have required a fundamental change in their way of thinking, something that’s still incredibly difficult for people. For me, understanding how science shifted in the minds of the people was crucial for seeing the whole picture, for understanding how science has this history.
