History of Science

[PoliticalChic]

1. 'The Enlightenment' has been given many differing definitions but it was, at its broadest, a philosophical movement of the eighteenth century which stressed human reasoning over blind faith or obedience and was thus in contrast with much of the religious and political order of the day, while also encouraging 'scientific' thinking. It was the belief that that reason can exist separate from civilization, and that ‘enlightened’ necessitates a repudiation of religion.
Philips, "The World Turned Upside Down"




2. The French invested 'reason' with the same dogmatic status as religion, creating a secular reflection of the Catholic Church. Reason, or nature, or the general will, became the civil religion. Thus authoritarianism was there from the time of the French Revolution.

a. Here, an interesting illustration of 'the religion of reason:'
" Has any reform been more futile? The Government’s arrogant discard of Christianity means that weeks have been extended to ten days instead of seven. The revision’s intent is to supplant the papal calendar with a uniform alternative of twelve months of thirty days each, based on the system of ancient Egypt.

Bibles themselves were torn up to make paper gun cartridges in the grim days of 1793, and now the biblical week has been guillotined, each month instead divided into three decades of ten days, with the year, with the year beginning at the autumn equinox and five to six holidays added to balance idealism with our solar orbit.

Not content with regimenting the calendar, the government has introduced a new metric system for weight and measure. There are even proposals for a new clock of precisely 100,000 seconds each day. Reason, reason!...The new calendar is the kind of logical idea imposed by clever people that completely ignores habit, emotion, and human nature and thus forecasts the Revolution’s doom."
From the novel “Napoleon’ Pyramids,” by William Dietrich





3. Auguste Comte argued that humanity progressed in three stages and that in the final stage mankind would throw off Christianity and replace it with a new “religion of humanity,” which married religious fervor to science and reason- even to the extent of making “saints” out of such figures as Shakespeare, Dante and Frederick the Great. Charles Forcey, “The Crossroads of Liberalism,” p. 15

a. For Comte, and the new scientific outlook, there could be no reference to the divine in any relation to understanding the natural world. Science would be accounted a failure if there was any but strictly material causes for any and all features of the natural world. In the 1840's, Comte's precis was that science progresses through three distinct phases.

1.) In the theological phase, it invokes the mysterious actions of the gods to explain natural phenomena, whether thunderbolts or the spread of disease.

2.) In a second, more advanced metaphysical stage, scientific explanations refer to abstract concepts like Plato's forms or Aristotle's final causes.

3.) Comte taught that science only reaches maturity when it casts aside such abstractions and explains natural phenomena by reference to natural laws or strictly material causes or processes. Only in this third and final stage can science achieve "positive" knowledge.
Stephen C. Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt," p. 20.





4. This dictum is so strong in the atheistic version of science today, that scientists who fail to follow it lose their standing, credentials, and careers, in the modern day version of the auto-da-fé, the Spanish Inquisition.

a. Without understanding the provenance, some, mistakenly, assign higher attributes to science than it deserves. Here is a noted scientist actually admitting that it is better to accept the absurd as scientific fact, than infract the above rule:

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,” the geneticist Richard Lewontin remarked in The New York Review of Books, “in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories.” We are to put up with science’s unsubstantiated just-so stories because, Lewontin explains, “we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door!”


"...the patent absurdity..."
"...failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises...":
"...tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories."



Is this what one means when they celebrate 'science'?

Or has a mistake been made in following the French line?

 

[flacaltenn]

3. Auguste Comte argued that humanity progressed in three stages and that in the final stage mankind would throw off Christianity and replace it with a new “religion of humanity,” which married religious fervor to science and reason- even to the extent of making “saints” out of such figures as Shakespeare, Dante and Frederick the Great. Charles Forcey, “The Crossroads of Liberalism,” p. 15

Never heard such a disconsonant phrase as "religious fervor to science and reason".. I'm calling out Comte as poser wannabee who understands neither sainthood or science. A playright, a king and a warped philosopher??

Guess the folks we encounter that DO HAVE "religious fervor to science and reason" might similiarly be posers with little appreciation of the "divine tools" that they worship..

 

[Unkotare]

History

 

[PoliticalChic]

3. Auguste Comte argued that humanity progressed in three stages and that in the final stage mankind would throw off Christianity and replace it with a new “religion of humanity,” which married religious fervor to science and reason- even to the extent of making “saints” out of such figures as Shakespeare, Dante and Frederick the Great. Charles Forcey, “The Crossroads of Liberalism,” p. 15

Never heard such a disconsonant phrase as "religious fervor to science and reason".. I'm calling out Comte as poser wannabee who understands neither sainthood or science. A playright, a king and a warped philosopher??

Guess the folks we encounter that DO HAVE "religious fervor to science and reason" might similiarly be posers with little appreciation of the "divine tools" that they worship..

'Never heard such a disconsonant phrase as "religious fervor to science and reason".'

Perhaps this will help:

1. With the Jacobins in control, the “de-Christianization” campaign kicked into high gear. Inspired by Rousseau’s idea of the religion civile, the revolution sought to completely destroy Christianity and replace it with a religion of the state. To honor “reason” and fulfill the promise of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen that “no one may be questioned about his opinions, including his religious views,”

Catholic priests were forced to stand before the revolutionary clubs and take oaths to France’s new humanocentric religion, the Cult of Reason

a. "The Cult of Reason (French: Culte de la Raison)a was an atheistic belief system established in France and intended as a replacement for Christianity during the French Revolution."
Cult of Reason - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


2. In lieu of religious holidays, which were banned, the revolutionaries put on “Fetes of Reason.” The first was in November 1793, in the Notre Dame Cathedral, which had been renamed “The Temple of Reason,” with “To Philosophy” carved on the façade and the altar named the “Altar of Reason.” It was an ACLU fantasy come true!
Coulter, "Demonic," chapter seven



Do you detect a certain 'religious fervor'?

 

[Toronado3800]

PC, the Catholic church of the past made many enemies and has a dubvious record with scientific advances which challenged non essential doctrine we now consider obsolete.

When you use Christianity are you referring to all the mini Catholic religions also? The ones which sprung up because the Catholic church had wandered too far from the simple teachings of Jesus?

To imagine the world of a few centuries ago (when are we talking about exactly), I imagine a wold run by militant Dugger family folks who would kill you if you said the earth was not the center of the galaxy. Oddly enough the same folks who a thousand and some change years previously have the reputation of being essential to European history for being the vault which retained scholarly works after the fall of Rome.

 

[Unkotare]

PC, the Catholic church of the past made many enemies and has a dubvious record with scientific advances which challenged non essential doctrine we now consider obsolete..

You didn't read my link, didja?

 

[PoliticalChic]

PC, the Catholic church of the past made many enemies and has a dubvious record with scientific advances which challenged non essential doctrine we now consider obsolete.

When you use Christianity are you referring to all the mini Catholic religions also? The ones which sprung up because the Catholic church had wandered too far from the simple teachings of Jesus?

To imagine the world of a few centuries ago (when are we talking about exactly), I imagine a wold run by militant Dugger family folks who would kill you if you said the earth was not the center of the galaxy. Oddly enough the same folks who a thousand and some change years previously have the reputation of being essential to European history for being the vault which retained scholarly works after the fall of Rome.

1. Either you have posted to the wrong thread, or you are so unnerved by the veracity of the OP, skewering you most closely held beliefs, that you are trying to cloud the issue.

That would be very naughty.




2. To review, the essence of the OP is that the vicious hatred of religion exemplified by the French Revolution's corruption of the Enlightenment.....a feeling which I detect in your post, e.g., "militant Dugger family folks who would kill you,"....produced the bastardization of science that we see, today, in such absurdities as 'Global Warming.'




3. "PC, the Catholic church of the past made many enemies and has a dubvious (sic) record with scientific advances which challenged non essential doctrine we now consider obsolete."

Hold, while I retrieve my Da Vinci Code, so as to translate that paragraph.




4. "When you use Christianity are you referring to all the mini Catholic religions also? The ones which sprung up because the Catholic church had wandered too far from the simple teachings of Jesus?"

It seems that you read only the title.....and misread it as "History of the Catholic Church."
Nay, nay.

Peruse the OP more carefully.



5. "...I imagine a wold (sic) run by militant Dugger family folks who would kill you if you said the earth was not the center of the galaxy."

I've seen poor posts by you in the past....but, here, you abuse the privilege.
None of the above was true....and certainly not during the French Revolution and beyond.




6. "Oddly enough the same folks who a thousand and some change years previously have the reputation of being essential to European history for being the vault which retained scholarly works after the fall of Rome."

This one will require the Rosetta Stone.



Did you think that your post made sense???
If so, you must be sitting in an Ojibwe sweat lodge, on peyote.

If you are diabetic, indications are that this would be an opportune time to pop a few Toll House cookies.

Contact me when you return to this sphere.

 

[flacaltenn]

3. Auguste Comte argued that humanity progressed in three stages and that in the final stage mankind would throw off Christianity and replace it with a new “religion of humanity,” which married religious fervor to science and reason- even to the extent of making “saints” out of such figures as Shakespeare, Dante and Frederick the Great. Charles Forcey, “The Crossroads of Liberalism,” p. 15

Never heard such a disconsonant phrase as "religious fervor to science and reason".. I'm calling out Comte as poser wannabee who understands neither sainthood or science. A playright, a king and a warped philosopher??

Guess the folks we encounter that DO HAVE "religious fervor to science and reason" might similiarly be posers with little appreciation of the "divine tools" that they worship..

'Never heard such a disconsonant phrase as "religious fervor to science and reason".'

Perhaps this will help:

1. With the Jacobins in control, the “de-Christianization” campaign kicked into high gear. Inspired by Rousseau’s idea of the religion civile, the revolution sought to completely destroy Christianity and replace it with a religion of the state. To honor “reason” and fulfill the promise of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen that “no one may be questioned about his opinions, including his religious views,”

Catholic priests were forced to stand before the revolutionary clubs and take oaths to France’s new humanocentric religion, the Cult of Reason

a. "The Cult of Reason (French: Culte de la Raison)a was an atheistic belief system established in France and intended as a replacement for Christianity during the French Revolution."
Cult of Reason - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


2. In lieu of religious holidays, which were banned, the revolutionaries put on “Fetes of Reason.” The first was in November 1793, in the Notre Dame Cathedral, which had been renamed “The Temple of Reason,” with “To Philosophy” carved on the façade and the altar named the “Altar of Reason.” It was an ACLU fantasy come true!
Coulter, "Demonic," chapter seven



Do you detect a certain 'religious fervor'?

Thats all pretty ugly and embarrassing. Could just chalk it up to being French----
But it does teach a lesson. That whether you are a church or an arrogant mob of elitist atheists, You are only a threat to me if u hijack the apparatus of the state with the generous powers ive ceded to it.

The state poisons science and reason as it perverts the church and faith.

 

[Toronado3800]

1. 'The Enlightenment' has been given many differing definitions but it was, at its broadest, a philosophical movement of the eighteenth century which stressed human reasoning over blind faith or obedience and was thus in contrast with much of the religious and political order of the day, while also encouraging 'scientific' thinking. It was the belief that that reason can exist separate from civilization, and that ‘enlightened’ necessitates a repudiation of religion.
Philips, "The World Turned Upside Down"




2. The French invested 'reason' with the same dogmatic status as religion, creating a secular reflection of the Catholic Church. Reason, or nature, or the general will, became the civil religion. Thus authoritarianism was there from the time of the French Revolution.

a. Here, an interesting illustration of 'the religion of reason:'
" Has any reform been more futile? The Government’s arrogant discard of Christianity means that weeks have been extended to ten days instead of seven. The revision’s intent is to supplant the papal calendar with a uniform alternative of twelve months of thirty days each, based on the system of ancient Egypt.

Bibles themselves were torn up to make paper gun cartridges in the grim days of 1793, and now the biblical week has been guillotined, each month instead divided into three decades of ten days, with the year, with the year beginning at the autumn equinox and five to six holidays added to balance idealism with our solar orbit.

Not content with regimenting the calendar, the government has introduced a new metric system for weight and measure. There are even proposals for a new clock of precisely 100,000 seconds each day. Reason, reason!...The new calendar is the kind of logical idea imposed by clever people that completely ignores habit, emotion, and human nature and thus forecasts the Revolution’s doom."
From the novel “Napoleon’ Pyramids,” by William Dietrich





3. Auguste Comte argued that humanity progressed in three stages and that in the final stage mankind would throw off Christianity and replace it with a new “religion of humanity,” which married religious fervor to science and reason- even to the extent of making “saints” out of such figures as Shakespeare, Dante and Frederick the Great. Charles Forcey, “The Crossroads of Liberalism,” p. 15

a. For Comte, and the new scientific outlook, there could be no reference to the divine in any relation to understanding the natural world. Science would be accounted a failure if there was any but strictly material causes for any and all features of the natural world. In the 1840's, Comte's precis was that science progresses through three distinct phases.

1.) In the theological phase, it invokes the mysterious actions of the gods to explain natural phenomena, whether thunderbolts or the spread of disease.

2.) In a second, more advanced metaphysical stage, scientific explanations refer to abstract concepts like Plato's forms or Aristotle's final causes.

3.) Comte taught that science only reaches maturity when it casts aside such abstractions and explains natural phenomena by reference to natural laws or strictly material causes or processes. Only in this third and final stage can science achieve "positive" knowledge.
Stephen C. Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt," p. 20.





4. This dictum is so strong in the atheistic version of science today, that scientists who fail to follow it lose their standing, credentials, and careers, in the modern day version of the auto-da-fé, the Spanish Inquisition.

a. Without understanding the provenance, some, mistakenly, assign higher attributes to science than it deserves. Here is a noted scientist actually admitting that it is better to accept the absurd as scientific fact, than infract the above rule:

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,” the geneticist Richard Lewontin remarked in The New York Review of Books, “in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories.” We are to put up with science’s unsubstantiated just-so stories because, Lewontin explains, “we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door!”


"...the patent absurdity..."
"...failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises...":
"...tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories."



Is this what one means when they celebrate 'science'?

Or has a mistake been made in following the French line?

Fine. I will let this go slower.

First, Catholicism and Christianity are not the same thing. Christianity is a whole group of religions based on the New Testament. Catholicism is the church of the Pope. Your point #2 seemed to confuse the issue. We can debate for and against science and any combination of Catholics or Christians but lets try to figure out which ones we are talking about.

Catholicism vs Christianity - Difference and Comparison | Diffen
"Catholicism is a denomination, hence a subset, of Christianity. All Catholics are Christians, but not all Christians are Catholics. A Christian refers to a follower of Jesus Christ who may be a Catholic, Protestant, Gnostic, Mormon, Evangelical, Anglican or Orthodox, or follower of another branch of the religion.

A Catholic refers to a Christian who follows the Catholic religion as transmitted through the succession of Popes of Rome and the Vatican Empire across history. The Pope is the leader of the Catholic church. The Catholic Church is the largest of the Christian Churches - about 60% of Christians are Catholic. "

I'll wait until later I guess to keep things simple.

 

[Care4all]

1. 'The Enlightenment' has been given many differing definitions but it was, at its broadest, a philosophical movement of the eighteenth century which stressed human reasoning over blind faith or obedience and was thus in contrast with much of the religious and political order of the day, while also encouraging 'scientific' thinking. It was the belief that that reason can exist separate from civilization, and that ‘enlightened’ necessitates a repudiation of religion.
Philips, "The World Turned Upside Down"




2. The French invested 'reason' with the same dogmatic status as religion, creating a secular reflection of the Catholic Church. Reason, or nature, or the general will, became the civil religion. Thus authoritarianism was there from the time of the French Revolution.

a. Here, an interesting illustration of 'the religion of reason:'
" Has any reform been more futile? The Government’s arrogant discard of Christianity means that weeks have been extended to ten days instead of seven. The revision’s intent is to supplant the papal calendar with a uniform alternative of twelve months of thirty days each, based on the system of ancient Egypt.

Bibles themselves were torn up to make paper gun cartridges in the grim days of 1793, and now the biblical week has been guillotined, each month instead divided into three decades of ten days, with the year, with the year beginning at the autumn equinox and five to six holidays added to balance idealism with our solar orbit.

Not content with regimenting the calendar, the government has introduced a new metric system for weight and measure. There are even proposals for a new clock of precisely 100,000 seconds each day. Reason, reason!...The new calendar is the kind of logical idea imposed by clever people that completely ignores habit, emotion, and human nature and thus forecasts the Revolution’s doom."
From the novel “Napoleon’ Pyramids,” by William Dietrich





3. Auguste Comte argued that humanity progressed in three stages and that in the final stage mankind would throw off Christianity and replace it with a new “religion of humanity,” which married religious fervor to science and reason- even to the extent of making “saints” out of such figures as Shakespeare, Dante and Frederick the Great. Charles Forcey, “The Crossroads of Liberalism,” p. 15

a. For Comte, and the new scientific outlook, there could be no reference to the divine in any relation to understanding the natural world. Science would be accounted a failure if there was any but strictly material causes for any and all features of the natural world. In the 1840's, Comte's precis was that science progresses through three distinct phases.

1.) In the theological phase, it invokes the mysterious actions of the gods to explain natural phenomena, whether thunderbolts or the spread of disease.

2.) In a second, more advanced metaphysical stage, scientific explanations refer to abstract concepts like Plato's forms or Aristotle's final causes.

3.) Comte taught that science only reaches maturity when it casts aside such abstractions and explains natural phenomena by reference to natural laws or strictly material causes or processes. Only in this third and final stage can science achieve "positive" knowledge.
Stephen C. Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt," p. 20.





4. This dictum is so strong in the atheistic version of science today, that scientists who fail to follow it lose their standing, credentials, and careers, in the modern day version of the auto-da-fé, the Spanish Inquisition.

a. Without understanding the provenance, some, mistakenly, assign higher attributes to science than it deserves. Here is a noted scientist actually admitting that it is better to accept the absurd as scientific fact, than infract the above rule:

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,” the geneticist Richard Lewontin remarked in The New York Review of Books, “in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories.” We are to put up with science’s unsubstantiated just-so stories because, Lewontin explains, “we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door!”


"...the patent absurdity..."
"...failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises...":
"...tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories."



Is this what one means when they celebrate 'science'?

Or has a mistake been made in following the French line?

Didn't the French Enlightenment/revolution Follow the American Enlightenment period?

The enlightenment period began in the 1600's and ENDED with the French Revolution, no?

Would there even be a USA without the Enlightenment?

American thinkers such as Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine...all driven by the Enlightenment...Reason over the church....

Would we even have a 1st Amendment if it were not for the enlightenment?

and would we have the laws of motion if it were not for sir Issac Newton, another Enlightenment thinker?

 

[rdean]

1. 'The Enlightenment' has been given many differing definitions but it was, at its broadest, a philosophical movement of the eighteenth century which stressed human reasoning over blind faith or obedience and was thus in contrast with much of the religious and political order of the day, while also encouraging 'scientific' thinking. It was the belief that that reason can exist separate from civilization, and that ‘enlightened’ necessitates a repudiation of religion.
Philips, "The World Turned Upside Down"




2. The French invested 'reason' with the same dogmatic status as religion, creating a secular reflection of the Catholic Church. Reason, or nature, or the general will, became the civil religion. Thus authoritarianism was there from the time of the French Revolution.

a. Here, an interesting illustration of 'the religion of reason:'
" Has any reform been more futile? The Government’s arrogant discard of Christianity means that weeks have been extended to ten days instead of seven. The revision’s intent is to supplant the papal calendar with a uniform alternative of twelve months of thirty days each, based on the system of ancient Egypt.

Bibles themselves were torn up to make paper gun cartridges in the grim days of 1793, and now the biblical week has been guillotined, each month instead divided into three decades of ten days, with the year, with the year beginning at the autumn equinox and five to six holidays added to balance idealism with our solar orbit.

Not content with regimenting the calendar, the government has introduced a new metric system for weight and measure. There are even proposals for a new clock of precisely 100,000 seconds each day. Reason, reason!...The new calendar is the kind of logical idea imposed by clever people that completely ignores habit, emotion, and human nature and thus forecasts the Revolution’s doom."
From the novel “Napoleon’ Pyramids,” by William Dietrich





3. Auguste Comte argued that humanity progressed in three stages and that in the final stage mankind would throw off Christianity and replace it with a new “religion of humanity,” which married religious fervor to science and reason- even to the extent of making “saints” out of such figures as Shakespeare, Dante and Frederick the Great. Charles Forcey, “The Crossroads of Liberalism,” p. 15

a. For Comte, and the new scientific outlook, there could be no reference to the divine in any relation to understanding the natural world. Science would be accounted a failure if there was any but strictly material causes for any and all features of the natural world. In the 1840's, Comte's precis was that science progresses through three distinct phases.

1.) In the theological phase, it invokes the mysterious actions of the gods to explain natural phenomena, whether thunderbolts or the spread of disease.

2.) In a second, more advanced metaphysical stage, scientific explanations refer to abstract concepts like Plato's forms or Aristotle's final causes.

3.) Comte taught that science only reaches maturity when it casts aside such abstractions and explains natural phenomena by reference to natural laws or strictly material causes or processes. Only in this third and final stage can science achieve "positive" knowledge.
Stephen C. Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt," p. 20.





4. This dictum is so strong in the atheistic version of science today, that scientists who fail to follow it lose their standing, credentials, and careers, in the modern day version of the auto-da-fé, the Spanish Inquisition.

a. Without understanding the provenance, some, mistakenly, assign higher attributes to science than it deserves. Here is a noted scientist actually admitting that it is better to accept the absurd as scientific fact, than infract the above rule:

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,” the geneticist Richard Lewontin remarked in The New York Review of Books, “in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories.” We are to put up with science’s unsubstantiated just-so stories because, Lewontin explains, “we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door!”


"...the patent absurdity..."
"...failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises...":
"...tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories."



Is this what one means when they celebrate 'science'?

Or has a mistake been made in following the French line?

Fine. I will let this go slower.

First, Catholicism and Christianity are not the same thing. Christianity is a whole group of religions based on the New Testament. Catholicism is the church of the Pope. Your point #2 seemed to confuse the issue. We can debate for and against science and any combination of Catholics or Christians but lets try to figure out which ones we are talking about.

Catholicism vs Christianity - Difference and Comparison | Diffen
"Catholicism is a denomination, hence a subset, of Christianity. All Catholics are Christians, but not all Christians are Catholics. A Christian refers to a follower of Jesus Christ who may be a Catholic, Protestant, Gnostic, Mormon, Evangelical, Anglican or Orthodox, or follower of another branch of the religion.

A Catholic refers to a Christian who follows the Catholic religion as transmitted through the succession of Popes of Rome and the Vatican Empire across history. The Pope is the leader of the Catholic church. The Catholic Church is the largest of the Christian Churches - about 60% of Christians are Catholic. "

I'll wait until later I guess to keep things simple.

I thought this was a thread about "science". Guess not.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. 'The Enlightenment' has been given many differing definitions but it was, at its broadest, a philosophical movement of the eighteenth century which stressed human reasoning over blind faith or obedience and was thus in contrast with much of the religious and political order of the day, while also encouraging 'scientific' thinking. It was the belief that that reason can exist separate from civilization, and that ‘enlightened’ necessitates a repudiation of religion.
Philips, "The World Turned Upside Down"




2. The French invested 'reason' with the same dogmatic status as religion, creating a secular reflection of the Catholic Church. Reason, or nature, or the general will, became the civil religion. Thus authoritarianism was there from the time of the French Revolution.

a. Here, an interesting illustration of 'the religion of reason:'
" Has any reform been more futile? The Government’s arrogant discard of Christianity means that weeks have been extended to ten days instead of seven. The revision’s intent is to supplant the papal calendar with a uniform alternative of twelve months of thirty days each, based on the system of ancient Egypt.

Bibles themselves were torn up to make paper gun cartridges in the grim days of 1793, and now the biblical week has been guillotined, each month instead divided into three decades of ten days, with the year, with the year beginning at the autumn equinox and five to six holidays added to balance idealism with our solar orbit.

Not content with regimenting the calendar, the government has introduced a new metric system for weight and measure. There are even proposals for a new clock of precisely 100,000 seconds each day. Reason, reason!...The new calendar is the kind of logical idea imposed by clever people that completely ignores habit, emotion, and human nature and thus forecasts the Revolution’s doom."
From the novel “Napoleon’ Pyramids,” by William Dietrich





3. Auguste Comte argued that humanity progressed in three stages and that in the final stage mankind would throw off Christianity and replace it with a new “religion of humanity,” which married religious fervor to science and reason- even to the extent of making “saints” out of such figures as Shakespeare, Dante and Frederick the Great. Charles Forcey, “The Crossroads of Liberalism,” p. 15

a. For Comte, and the new scientific outlook, there could be no reference to the divine in any relation to understanding the natural world. Science would be accounted a failure if there was any but strictly material causes for any and all features of the natural world. In the 1840's, Comte's precis was that science progresses through three distinct phases.

1.) In the theological phase, it invokes the mysterious actions of the gods to explain natural phenomena, whether thunderbolts or the spread of disease.

2.) In a second, more advanced metaphysical stage, scientific explanations refer to abstract concepts like Plato's forms or Aristotle's final causes.

3.) Comte taught that science only reaches maturity when it casts aside such abstractions and explains natural phenomena by reference to natural laws or strictly material causes or processes. Only in this third and final stage can science achieve "positive" knowledge.
Stephen C. Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt," p. 20.





4. This dictum is so strong in the atheistic version of science today, that scientists who fail to follow it lose their standing, credentials, and careers, in the modern day version of the auto-da-fé, the Spanish Inquisition.

a. Without understanding the provenance, some, mistakenly, assign higher attributes to science than it deserves. Here is a noted scientist actually admitting that it is better to accept the absurd as scientific fact, than infract the above rule:

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,” the geneticist Richard Lewontin remarked in The New York Review of Books, “in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories.” We are to put up with science’s unsubstantiated just-so stories because, Lewontin explains, “we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door!”


"...the patent absurdity..."
"...failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises...":
"...tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories."



Is this what one means when they celebrate 'science'?

Or has a mistake been made in following the French line?

Didn't the French Enlightenment/revolution Follow the American Enlightenment period?

The enlightenment period began in the 1600's and ENDED with the French Revolution, no?

Would there even be a USA without the Enlightenment?

American thinkers such as Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine...all driven by the Enlightenment...Reason over the church....

Would we even have a 1st Amendment if it were not for the enlightenment?

and would we have the laws of motion if it were not for sir Issac Newton, another Enlightenment thinker?

Hi, Care!

Haven't seen you in quite a while. Hope you have been well.

I would like to respond to your post...but as I consider constructing same, it occurs to me that such a great amount of clarification is required, that I would rather OP my response.

Would you mind if I quote your post in the OP?

I would, of course, use your name unless you would rather I not.

If I don't hear from you, I'll quote the post as 'anonymous.'


Thanks very much for your input. And inspiration.



You may be interested in my response to your post, here:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/scien...nlightenment-and-revolutions.html#post7860941

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. 'The Enlightenment' has been given many differing definitions but it was, at its broadest, a philosophical movement of the eighteenth century which stressed human reasoning over blind faith or obedience and was thus in contrast with much of the religious and political order of the day, while also encouraging 'scientific' thinking. It was the belief that that reason can exist separate from civilization, and that ‘enlightened’ necessitates a repudiation of religion.
Philips, "The World Turned Upside Down"




2. The French invested 'reason' with the same dogmatic status as religion, creating a secular reflection of the Catholic Church. Reason, or nature, or the general will, became the civil religion. Thus authoritarianism was there from the time of the French Revolution.

a. Here, an interesting illustration of 'the religion of reason:'
" Has any reform been more futile? The Government’s arrogant discard of Christianity means that weeks have been extended to ten days instead of seven. The revision’s intent is to supplant the papal calendar with a uniform alternative of twelve months of thirty days each, based on the system of ancient Egypt.

Bibles themselves were torn up to make paper gun cartridges in the grim days of 1793, and now the biblical week has been guillotined, each month instead divided into three decades of ten days, with the year, with the year beginning at the autumn equinox and five to six holidays added to balance idealism with our solar orbit.

Not content with regimenting the calendar, the government has introduced a new metric system for weight and measure. There are even proposals for a new clock of precisely 100,000 seconds each day. Reason, reason!...The new calendar is the kind of logical idea imposed by clever people that completely ignores habit, emotion, and human nature and thus forecasts the Revolution’s doom."
From the novel “Napoleon’ Pyramids,” by William Dietrich





3. Auguste Comte argued that humanity progressed in three stages and that in the final stage mankind would throw off Christianity and replace it with a new “religion of humanity,” which married religious fervor to science and reason- even to the extent of making “saints” out of such figures as Shakespeare, Dante and Frederick the Great. Charles Forcey, “The Crossroads of Liberalism,” p. 15

a. For Comte, and the new scientific outlook, there could be no reference to the divine in any relation to understanding the natural world. Science would be accounted a failure if there was any but strictly material causes for any and all features of the natural world. In the 1840's, Comte's precis was that science progresses through three distinct phases.

1.) In the theological phase, it invokes the mysterious actions of the gods to explain natural phenomena, whether thunderbolts or the spread of disease.

2.) In a second, more advanced metaphysical stage, scientific explanations refer to abstract concepts like Plato's forms or Aristotle's final causes.

3.) Comte taught that science only reaches maturity when it casts aside such abstractions and explains natural phenomena by reference to natural laws or strictly material causes or processes. Only in this third and final stage can science achieve "positive" knowledge.
Stephen C. Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt," p. 20.





4. This dictum is so strong in the atheistic version of science today, that scientists who fail to follow it lose their standing, credentials, and careers, in the modern day version of the auto-da-fé, the Spanish Inquisition.

a. Without understanding the provenance, some, mistakenly, assign higher attributes to science than it deserves. Here is a noted scientist actually admitting that it is better to accept the absurd as scientific fact, than infract the above rule:

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,” the geneticist Richard Lewontin remarked in The New York Review of Books, “in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories.” We are to put up with science’s unsubstantiated just-so stories because, Lewontin explains, “we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door!”


"...the patent absurdity..."
"...failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises...":
"...tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories."



Is this what one means when they celebrate 'science'?

Or has a mistake been made in following the French line?

Fine. I will let this go slower.

First, Catholicism and Christianity are not the same thing. Christianity is a whole group of religions based on the New Testament. Catholicism is the church of the Pope. Your point #2 seemed to confuse the issue. We can debate for and against science and any combination of Catholics or Christians but lets try to figure out which ones we are talking about.

Catholicism vs Christianity - Difference and Comparison | Diffen
"Catholicism is a denomination, hence a subset, of Christianity. All Catholics are Christians, but not all Christians are Catholics. A Christian refers to a follower of Jesus Christ who may be a Catholic, Protestant, Gnostic, Mormon, Evangelical, Anglican or Orthodox, or follower of another branch of the religion.

A Catholic refers to a Christian who follows the Catholic religion as transmitted through the succession of Popes of Rome and the Vatican Empire across history. The Pope is the leader of the Catholic church. The Catholic Church is the largest of the Christian Churches - about 60% of Christians are Catholic. "

I'll wait until later I guess to keep things simple.

I thought this was a thread about "science". Guess not.

Me, too.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. 'The Enlightenment' has been given many differing definitions but it was, at its broadest, a philosophical movement of the eighteenth century which stressed human reasoning over blind faith or obedience and was thus in contrast with much of the religious and political order of the day, while also encouraging 'scientific' thinking. It was the belief that that reason can exist separate from civilization, and that ‘enlightened’ necessitates a repudiation of religion.
Philips, "The World Turned Upside Down"




2. The French invested 'reason' with the same dogmatic status as religion, creating a secular reflection of the Catholic Church. Reason, or nature, or the general will, became the civil religion. Thus authoritarianism was there from the time of the French Revolution.

a. Here, an interesting illustration of 'the religion of reason:'
" Has any reform been more futile? The Government’s arrogant discard of Christianity means that weeks have been extended to ten days instead of seven. The revision’s intent is to supplant the papal calendar with a uniform alternative of twelve months of thirty days each, based on the system of ancient Egypt.

Bibles themselves were torn up to make paper gun cartridges in the grim days of 1793, and now the biblical week has been guillotined, each month instead divided into three decades of ten days, with the year, with the year beginning at the autumn equinox and five to six holidays added to balance idealism with our solar orbit.

Not content with regimenting the calendar, the government has introduced a new metric system for weight and measure. There are even proposals for a new clock of precisely 100,000 seconds each day. Reason, reason!...The new calendar is the kind of logical idea imposed by clever people that completely ignores habit, emotion, and human nature and thus forecasts the Revolution’s doom."
From the novel “Napoleon’ Pyramids,” by William Dietrich





3. Auguste Comte argued that humanity progressed in three stages and that in the final stage mankind would throw off Christianity and replace it with a new “religion of humanity,” which married religious fervor to science and reason- even to the extent of making “saints” out of such figures as Shakespeare, Dante and Frederick the Great. Charles Forcey, “The Crossroads of Liberalism,” p. 15

a. For Comte, and the new scientific outlook, there could be no reference to the divine in any relation to understanding the natural world. Science would be accounted a failure if there was any but strictly material causes for any and all features of the natural world. In the 1840's, Comte's precis was that science progresses through three distinct phases.

1.) In the theological phase, it invokes the mysterious actions of the gods to explain natural phenomena, whether thunderbolts or the spread of disease.

2.) In a second, more advanced metaphysical stage, scientific explanations refer to abstract concepts like Plato's forms or Aristotle's final causes.

3.) Comte taught that science only reaches maturity when it casts aside such abstractions and explains natural phenomena by reference to natural laws or strictly material causes or processes. Only in this third and final stage can science achieve "positive" knowledge.
Stephen C. Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt," p. 20.





4. This dictum is so strong in the atheistic version of science today, that scientists who fail to follow it lose their standing, credentials, and careers, in the modern day version of the auto-da-fé, the Spanish Inquisition.

a. Without understanding the provenance, some, mistakenly, assign higher attributes to science than it deserves. Here is a noted scientist actually admitting that it is better to accept the absurd as scientific fact, than infract the above rule:

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,” the geneticist Richard Lewontin remarked in The New York Review of Books, “in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories.” We are to put up with science’s unsubstantiated just-so stories because, Lewontin explains, “we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door!”


"...the patent absurdity..."
"...failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises...":
"...tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories."



Is this what one means when they celebrate 'science'?

Or has a mistake been made in following the French line?

Fine. I will let this go slower.

First, Catholicism and Christianity are not the same thing. Christianity is a whole group of religions based on the New Testament. Catholicism is the church of the Pope. Your point #2 seemed to confuse the issue. We can debate for and against science and any combination of Catholics or Christians but lets try to figure out which ones we are talking about.

Catholicism vs Christianity - Difference and Comparison | Diffen
"Catholicism is a denomination, hence a subset, of Christianity. All Catholics are Christians, but not all Christians are Catholics. A Christian refers to a follower of Jesus Christ who may be a Catholic, Protestant, Gnostic, Mormon, Evangelical, Anglican or Orthodox, or follower of another branch of the religion.

A Catholic refers to a Christian who follows the Catholic religion as transmitted through the succession of Popes of Rome and the Vatican Empire across history. The Pope is the leader of the Catholic church. The Catholic Church is the largest of the Christian Churches - about 60% of Christians are Catholic. "

I'll wait until later I guess to keep things simple.

The problem is less one of 'speed' than of comprehension.

But....If Care allows me to, I will OP one that combines the subject of the OP, with your topic.


Stay tuned.

 

[Toronado3800]

Perhaps I combine too many trains if thought in one post in an effort to condence.

And many of my posts are written on one of these handy yet limited touch screen devices.

Back on subject I frequently give the Catholic church a difficult time for its actions previous to the era you are speaking of. The Protestants (Christians) are all over the place so they are more difficult to talk aboit as a group. Consider my Christian Scientist friends and their 6,500 year old earth and how different that is from the view of the more liberal Lutherans. Catholicism has its sects but at least as an entity it is easier to say "well in 1550 if you thought the earth orbited the sun the pope disagreed".

 

[PoliticalChic]

Perhaps I combine too many trains if thought in one post in an effort to condence.

And many of my posts are written on one of these handy yet limited touch screen devices.

Back on subject I frequently give the Catholic church a difficult time for its actions previous to the era you are speaking of. The Protestants (Christians) are all over the place so they are more difficult to talk aboit as a group. Consider my Christian Scientist friends and their 6,500 year old earth and how different that is from the view of the more liberal Lutherans. Catholicism has its sects but at least as an entity it is easier to say "well in 1550 if you thought the earth orbited the sun the pope disagreed".

1. "And many of my posts are written on one of these handy yet limited touch screen devices.

And many of your posts are written under the influence of joy-juice.


2. "Back on subject..."

Au contraire.

You have yet to engage the subject.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Perhaps I combine too many trains if thought in one post in an effort to condence.

And many of my posts are written on one of these handy yet limited touch screen devices.

Back on subject I frequently give the Catholic church a difficult time for its actions previous to the era you are speaking of. The Protestants (Christians) are all over the place so they are more difficult to talk aboit as a group. Consider my Christian Scientist friends and their 6,500 year old earth and how different that is from the view of the more liberal Lutherans. Catholicism has its sects but at least as an entity it is easier to say "well in 1550 if you thought the earth orbited the sun the pope disagreed".

You might be interested in this:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/scien...nlightenment-and-revolutions.html#post7860941

 

[flacaltenn]

1. 'The Enlightenment' has been given many differing definitions but it was, at its broadest, a philosophical movement of the eighteenth century which stressed human reasoning over blind faith or obedience and was thus in contrast with much of the religious and political order of the day, while also encouraging 'scientific' thinking. It was the belief that that reason can exist separate from civilization, and that ‘enlightened’ necessitates a repudiation of religion.
Philips, "The World Turned Upside Down"




2. The French invested 'reason' with the same dogmatic status as religion, creating a secular reflection of the Catholic Church. Reason, or nature, or the general will, became the civil religion. Thus authoritarianism was there from the time of the French Revolution.

a. Here, an interesting illustration of 'the religion of reason:'
" Has any reform been more futile? The Government’s arrogant discard of Christianity means that weeks have been extended to ten days instead of seven. The revision’s intent is to supplant the papal calendar with a uniform alternative of twelve months of thirty days each, based on the system of ancient Egypt.

Bibles themselves were torn up to make paper gun cartridges in the grim days of 1793, and now the biblical week has been guillotined, each month instead divided into three decades of ten days, with the year, with the year beginning at the autumn equinox and five to six holidays added to balance idealism with our solar orbit.

Not content with regimenting the calendar, the government has introduced a new metric system for weight and measure. There are even proposals for a new clock of precisely 100,000 seconds each day. Reason, reason!...The new calendar is the kind of logical idea imposed by clever people that completely ignores habit, emotion, and human nature and thus forecasts the Revolution’s doom."
From the novel “Napoleon’ Pyramids,” by William Dietrich





3. Auguste Comte argued that humanity progressed in three stages and that in the final stage mankind would throw off Christianity and replace it with a new “religion of humanity,” which married religious fervor to science and reason- even to the extent of making “saints” out of such figures as Shakespeare, Dante and Frederick the Great. Charles Forcey, “The Crossroads of Liberalism,” p. 15

a. For Comte, and the new scientific outlook, there could be no reference to the divine in any relation to understanding the natural world. Science would be accounted a failure if there was any but strictly material causes for any and all features of the natural world. In the 1840's, Comte's precis was that science progresses through three distinct phases.

1.) In the theological phase, it invokes the mysterious actions of the gods to explain natural phenomena, whether thunderbolts or the spread of disease.

2.) In a second, more advanced metaphysical stage, scientific explanations refer to abstract concepts like Plato's forms or Aristotle's final causes.

3.) Comte taught that science only reaches maturity when it casts aside such abstractions and explains natural phenomena by reference to natural laws or strictly material causes or processes. Only in this third and final stage can science achieve "positive" knowledge.
Stephen C. Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt," p. 20.





4. This dictum is so strong in the atheistic version of science today, that scientists who fail to follow it lose their standing, credentials, and careers, in the modern day version of the auto-da-fé, the Spanish Inquisition.

a. Without understanding the provenance, some, mistakenly, assign higher attributes to science than it deserves. Here is a noted scientist actually admitting that it is better to accept the absurd as scientific fact, than infract the above rule:

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,” the geneticist Richard Lewontin remarked in The New York Review of Books, “in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories.” We are to put up with science’s unsubstantiated just-so stories because, Lewontin explains, “we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door!”


"...the patent absurdity..."
"...failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises...":
"...tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories."



Is this what one means when they celebrate 'science'?

Or has a mistake been made in following the French line?

Didn't the French Enlightenment/revolution Follow the American Enlightenment period?

The enlightenment period began in the 1600's and ENDED with the French Revolution, no?

Would there even be a USA without the Enlightenment?

American thinkers such as Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine...all driven by the Enlightenment...Reason over the church....

Would we even have a 1st Amendment if it were not for the enlightenment?

and would we have the laws of motion if it were not for sir Issac Newton, another Enlightenment thinker?

Good point. But our Founders got the religion part correct.. The French elitists got it wrong. Our founding was based on spiritual (but not wholly religious) beliefs in God.. That made us humble enough to NOT start whacking heads off of the dissenters.

In fact -- the hope of the Founders was for a separate moral superstructure to give us the strength of character to HANDLE all that enlightened freedom.. Today --- we don't measure up as well...

 

[flacaltenn]

That Lewontin quote about a "Divine foot in the door" is observed in MANY aspects of science that violate the sanity of reason.. Things like the Big Bang or aspects of Evolution, some of the underpinnings of quantum mechanics and medicine as well..

It's well phrased and describes the last resort of many a science teacher I've had when the questioning gets too aggressive..

 

[Toronado3800]

Perhaps I combine too many trains if thought in one post in an effort to condence.

And many of my posts are written on one of these handy yet limited touch screen devices.

Back on subject I frequently give the Catholic church a difficult time for its actions previous to the era you are speaking of. The Protestants (Christians) are all over the place so they are more difficult to talk aboit as a group. Consider my Christian Scientist friends and their 6,500 year old earth and how different that is from the view of the more liberal Lutherans. Catholicism has its sects but at least as an entity it is easier to say "well in 1550 if you thought the earth orbited the sun the pope disagreed".

1. "And many of my posts are written on one of these handy yet limited touch screen devices.

And many of your posts are written under the influence of joy-juice.


2. "Back on subject..."

Au contraire.

You have yet to engage the subject.

I am confused by your lack of engagement to your subject here.

Lets take a simple part of the Catholic Church vs science debate.

The Earth orbits the sun.

In the 17th century this seemed to contradict Chronicles 16:30 and some other versus. So Galileo was locked up.

I view this as a point against the Catholic Church and for the enlightenment. Similar problems were coming up for the Catholic Church in all forms of science and they were slow to adapt.

Is there more to this movement to be debated?