
Then let's bring Einstein's General Theory of Relativity into it and throw Euclidean Geometry out the window.
( ,
Wed 26 Oct 2011, 18:00,
archived)

i think a theory that explains the three dimensional world, without knowledge of gravitation, that still stands today is pretty good.
and the hebrews, christians or muslims contribution to this field in the intervening 2000 years is what?
( ,
Wed 26 Oct 2011, 18:18,
archived)
and the hebrews, christians or muslims contribution to this field in the intervening 2000 years is what?

I've already told you the Muslim contribution, they did loads of good science. As did a lot of Christians, Christianity founded a great deal of research. We also have to thank such people as William of Ockham, the 13th century Franciscan Friar who gave us that Ockham's Razor thing you atheists like to bang on about. The Muslims did so well partly because while they had read the works of Aristotle, they didn't take it as gospel truth. Then Galileo came along and proved it wrong on a few more points. I can hardly emphasize this point enough so I'll even capitalise it: ARISTOTLE'S PHYSICS COMPLETELY WRONG ABOUT EVERYTHING.
Plato did a little better, to be honest. He came up with the idea, foreign to previous generations of Greeks, of a God created the universe. He also inspired the various Gnostic sects. Unfortunately some people took his story of Atlantis a little seriously, although mostly not until the modern day I must add.
( ,
Wed 26 Oct 2011, 18:28,
archived)
Plato did a little better, to be honest. He came up with the idea, foreign to previous generations of Greeks, of a God created the universe. He also inspired the various Gnostic sects. Unfortunately some people took his story of Atlantis a little seriously, although mostly not until the modern day I must add.


this house was built in the 1950s. I don't think they used a computer.
Euclidean Geometry - yes, great. Consequences for religion and mysticism: NIL.
( ,
Wed 26 Oct 2011, 18:37,
archived)
Euclidean Geometry - yes, great. Consequences for religion and mysticism: NIL.

so when a christian, a hebrew or a muslim makes a scientific discovery it's because of their religion and therefore of great importance, but when someone like euclid comes up with something of real significance it's irrelevant.
smacks of apologist sentiment to me.
( ,
Wed 26 Oct 2011, 18:47,
archived)
smacks of apologist sentiment to me.

that "the Greeks were making good headway in discrediting religion and mysticism". Quite a lot of the Greek philosophers were very mystical, in fact. Of course Galileo et al didn't discredit Aristotelian physics because he was a Christian, but you speak as if religious people never said anything clever at all, as if religion were opposed in principle to science, or even to thinking, and that the bounties of modernity are all ultimately creditable to the Greeks.
( ,
Wed 26 Oct 2011, 18:58,
archived)

especially with an administration like the catholic church as the dominant authority
( ,
Wed 26 Oct 2011, 19:05,
archived)

Religious people have said clever things throughout the ages and not because they were any less religious than their contemporaries. Being clever and being religious are entirely orthogonal properties. And you haven't read up on the Conflict Thesis yet, have you?
( ,
Wed 26 Oct 2011, 19:09,
archived)

is in no way a hindrance?
I did the conflict thesis at university yes, shall I list a load of literature and you can tell me if you've read up on it?
( ,
Wed 26 Oct 2011, 19:28,
archived)
I did the conflict thesis at university yes, shall I list a load of literature and you can tell me if you've read up on it?