History Of Science And The Natural Sciences

It was the middle of the 20th century, the world was in disorder yet peace as it did its best to recover from World War II. Nations from both sides of what is still considered one of the greatest outbreaks of war in history were not only competing in the air, in the sea, and on land, but also in the field of science. After the war, America made an astutely tactful choice: they took the German scientists for employment in the states. The outcome of this tactic included not only the advantages America saw in the recovery from the war, but also those which have evolved and advanced into many scientific advancements we see today; some of these include the Saturn V rocket, which made the success of the Apollo 11 mission possible. This event, Operation Paperclip, as it was called, was not the only paramount occurrence leading to the success of America’s scientific field, however. The Manhattan Project also led to things we still see today, such as the still-tense subject of nuclear weapons and the aptly following Nuclear Proliferation Act. Simply put, Operation Paperclip and other related events paved the way for many scientific advancements still seen today, and it established the method of working internationally to achieve great things.

On the brink of discovery there is a thrilling glow of hope and promise. The hope of a betterment of life as it is and the promise of something new and exciting. The turn of the twentieth century was this threshold of opportunity and anticipation, and a booming era for scientists and inventors alike. Between 1900 and 1920 a plethora of modern day conveniences and concepts were brought to life. Without this unique period in time civilization might have had to do without escalators, Gillette’s double edged safety razor, modern vacuum cleaners, air conditioning, the Teddy Bear, crayons, airplanes, E=mc2, automobiles, Life Savers candy, and the bra, just to name a few.1 Along with the glitter of innovation can come an unintentional (and sometimes

During the seventeenth century, the scientific revolution in Europe was at its peak, changing people’s lives through the new techniques of the scientific method. Citizens of western civilizations had previously used religion as the lens through which they perceived their beliefs and customs in their communities. Before the scientific revolution, science and religion were intertwined, and people were taught to accept religious laws and doctrines without questioning; the Church was the ultimate authority on how the world worked. However, during this revolution, scientists were inspired to learn and understand the laws of the universe had created, a noble and controversial move toward truth seeking. The famous scientists of the time, such as Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo and Newton, were known to be natural philosophers, intending to reveal God’s mystery and understand (through proof) the majesty of God. Throughout previous centuries, people had hypothesized how the world and natural phenomenon may work, and new Protestant ideals demanded constant interrogation and examination. Nevertheless, some of these revelations went against the Church’s teachings and authority. If people believed the Church could be wrong, then they could question everything around them, as well. As a result, the introduction of the scientific method, a process by which scientists discovered and proved new theories, was revolutionary because it distinguished what could be proved as real from what was simply

In the beginning God created the heavens with the Earth along with man in his own image. For over 1500 years, Christian followers were heavy believers of the bible, seeing it as the primary source for knowledge. Then came the scientific revolution in the 1500s, a movement which challenged the Christian view of the universe. It was a time when people were looking for a new way of thinking about the world. Since then and to this day, there has been several instances in which scientific inquiry and religious belief have collided in their ideologies.

In the book “ The Scientific Revolution: A Very Short Introduction”, Lawrence Principe discusses the general occurring events of the scientific revolution, and overviews various in-depth details in relation to those events. People at the time highly focused on the meanings and causes of their surrounds, as their motive was to “control, improve and exploit” (Principe 2) the world. In his work, Principe has successfully supported the notion that the Scientific Revolution stood as a period in time where one's innovation would drive improvements towards change and continuity of future innovations, along with changes of tradition. His statement is strongly backed by his detailed and particular order of events throughout the book. Nevertheless, certain details that lead beyond the necessary background are found, as they do not appertain to the general line of the book, but rather for background knowledge.

During the Scientific Revolution scientists such as Galileo, Copernicus, Descartes and Bacon wrestled with questions about God, human aptitude, and the possibilities of understanding the world. Eventually, the implications of the new scientific findings began to affect the way people thought and behaved throughout Europe. Society began to question the authority of traditional knowledge about the universe. This in turn, allowed them to question traditional views of the state and social order. No longer was the world constructed as the somewhat simple Ptolemaic Model suggested. The Earth for the first time became explicable and was no longer the center of the universe. Many beliefs that had been held for hundreds of years now proved to be

The Scientific Revolution was when modern science was essentially established, which came along with the major scientific discoveries took place at the time. Some major scientists that contributed to this major era include Nicholas Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Galileo Galilei, and Isaac Newton. The scientific revolution took place following the Renaissance, from the mid-1500’s until about 1700. This revolution took place throughout Europe. This occurred because, following the Renaissance and the reformation, people became very curious and wanted to understand how the Earth worked. It was almost as if, being that this occurred after the reformation, that they wanted to either confirm or refute the church’s claims. The significance of the scientific revolution was one of great proportions, it changed mankind’s understanding the importance of science, and of how the Earth and solar system function.

Throughout history there have been many different movements that have shape society into what it is today. In the Pre-modern Era (1450-1750) idea to challenge the traditional institution such catholic or absolute theory, was becoming a bigger factor day by day. This idea gave people more individual right and freedom. In the 1540-1690 the scientific revolution was one of those movements that change the mind of many people. This revolution gave a voice to society to speak about their opinions on space, communities and many more things.

The Scientific Revolution was at its height during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries with many supporters and critics of the works of scientists. It was the transition from the medieval, philosophical and religious perspective to a secular and rational perspective. One of the biggest debates that defined the Scientific Revolution was the debate over whether the universe was geocentric (with the earth at the center of the universe), or heliocentric (with the earth revolving around the sun). The works of these scientists was influenced by political leaders for their desire in power, the clash of ideas between religious leaders and institutions, and differentiation towards female scientists and unorganization in research. In all, each of these three parts of society contributed to the Scientific Revolution in very important ways.

This essay will focus on how those works are informed by both regional and international course. In this context, Sydney Ancher and his strong Miesian simplicity as well as Peter Muller’s affinity with Frank Lloyd Wright’s organic architecture principle.

The world of science, as we know it today, is a difficult subject to grasp. So many new ideas are present and these new ideas are not interchangeable. Some parts do work together although as a whole they don’t fully coincide with each other. The three basic ideas that science is now based upon come from Newton, Einstein, and Hawking. I call these ideas/theories “new” based on what I classify the state of the scientific community of today. After looking at what is going on in science, it is clear to me that the scientific world is in a crisis state. According to Kuhn, a crisis state is when science is in the middle of choosing a particular paradigm to work under. For scientists, there is a general theme

I chose this question since it has actually stayed with me for the whole TOK course. I found it very difficult to find a link, for example, of perception in math or how reason could fit into art. A network suggests that more than one way of knowing can collaborate within another in order to gain knowledge in a particular Area of knowing. The statement implies that not using a network of WOK to gain knowledge is unwise. Thus, I wish to examine how we best acquire knowledge in Natural Sciences and History. My two central knowledge questions are, how reliable is it to use only one way of knowing in one Area of knowledge in order to gain knowledge? and Is it essential to use a network of ways of knowing to acquire good knowledge?

Disagreement may aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences because disagreement leads to new discoveries. Disagreement is about gathering reliable knowledge as well as using this newfound knowledge, and occurs when a group fails to reach a consensus over the logic of an argument. Knowledge is composed of facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education. Two areas of knowledge that are impacted by disagreement are human science and natural science. Human science is the study of human behavior and how humans gather information. Natural science is a branch of science that deals with the physical world. In order for a disagreement to occur, one must be familiar with the subject and have his or her own prediction that is different from the norm. Therefore, to advance knowledge in the areas of human and natural science, people must disagree. The roles of logic, reason, and emotion will be investigated to see how they are used to help gain new knowledge in both human and natural science.

Natural science has been historically recognised as one of the factors affecting the development of social science; particularly, during the period of the Enlightenment, natural science had been one of the factors to improve human life (Turner, 2001: 30). The Enlightenment is to help humans emerge from immaturity and this aim finds expression in Kant’s motto “Dare to know” (Kant, 1784). During the period of the Enlightenment, due to the remarkable scientific advancement, traditional religion-based societies tended to come to an end and there occurred two revolutions particularly in Western Europe: the French Revolution and the Industrial Revolution. Owing to them, society had been radically changed in terms of politics and economy albeit new other problems had been brought such as job competition and capital-based societies, in other word, capitalism (Hossain and Mustari, 2012: 64; Gollin, 1970: 1). As a result, in spite of the end of the absolute monarchy, there still remained the inequality in societies.

Before Einstein, Scientists believed that light waves travelled through a medium called ether. Einstein proved that ether was irrelevant and that light doesn’t travel through a medium. Einstein proved this by figuring out that the speed of light was constant, and in order for ether to be the medium light waves travel through, the speed of light would change depending on the observer. This discovery was one piece of the Specific Theory of Relativity.