<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Natusaurus &#187; History of Science</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bromei.nl/natusaurus/category/histscience/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bromei.nl/natusaurus</link>
	<description>Natural History in Science and Religion</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 12:57:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>A Role for History</title>
		<link>http://bromei.nl/natusaurus/2011/02/a-role-for-history/</link>
		<comments>http://bromei.nl/natusaurus/2011/02/a-role-for-history/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2011 16:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Faith and Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[History of Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science and Religion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bromei.nl/natusaurus/?p=166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[- Review of Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths about Science and Religion, by Ronald Numbers (ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts &#38; London, England, 2009. 302 pages plus contents.
Galileo Goes to Jail is a book I would highly recommend, as an accessible and quick-reading introduction to many historical aspects of science and religion. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>- Review of </em>Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths about Science and Religion<em>, by Ronald Numbers (ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts &amp; London, England, 2009. 302 pages plus contents.</em></p>
<p><strong><em>Galileo Goes to Jail</em> is a book I would highly recommend, as an accessible and quick-reading introduction to many historical aspects of science and religion. The book will challenge any reader&#8217;s presuppositions through a series of nuanced and educated essays.</strong></p>
<p>The historical approach to issues in science and religion is both useful and misleading. Useful, because it gives insights into how the relation between the two has actually developed as opposed to how any single person thinks they are principally related. However, history can be misleading when it is used as a normative benchmark for what should be or even what is normal. Sometimes I fool myself into thinking that extensive knowledge of history will make people act more sensibly. In reality, however, such knowledge is only what it is; it does not necessarily lead to anything.</p>
<p>Still I am convinced that the contributors to <em>Galileo Goes to Jail</em> had a good measure of idealism when writing this book. Surely they are convinced that knowing about the past relation between science and religion will make readers reconsider some radical or absolute views and think more nuanced about the subject. Christianity was not science&#8217;s enemy, but neither was it the sole driver of scientific curiosity. Islam has made important contributions to science. Religious scientists did not &#8216;outgrow&#8217; a set of naïve superstitions in order to become rational champions, but neither were they blessed with a fully worked out research program based on whatever tradition they believed in. The book tries to find a middle ground between views and confront every reader with his or her bias. Nuance can be confrontational, as it turns out.</p>
<p>The approach of the book is chronological. Each short chapter starts with a bluntly formulated myth. In the context of the book, a myth is synonymous with a falsehood. Each myth is accompanied by two or three quotes from reputable or well known sources that, to some degree, perpetuate the myth. These chapters all have different authors.</p>
<p>The first chapters deal with the medieval period, which means that there are no chapters about the classical period. Out of twenty-five myths, Copernicus is already the subject of myth number six, so there is a strong emphasis on the periods known as the scientific revolution, the enlightenment and the modern period. The subjects are not completely balanced. There is only one chapter about Islam, the others are explicitly about or most relevant to the relation between science and Christianity. Another imbalance lies in the myths generally adhered to by Christians and those that live among atheists. I think there are quite a few atheists who think that &#8216;the scientific revolution liberated science from religion&#8217; (myth #10), that &#8216;copernicanism demoted humans from the center of the cosmos from the center of the cosmos&#8217; (#6), or that &#8216;the Scopes trial ended in defeat for antievolutionism&#8217;. Christians may be slightly less confronted by ideas alien to them, although they will have to let go the notions that  &#8216;Einstein believed in a personal God&#8217; (#21) or that &#8216;Christianity gave birth to modern science&#8217; (#9).</p>
<p>This latter myth, dealing with the question of science having been helped or hindered by christianity during the scientific revolution, carries a rather ambiguous message. The author is Noah J. Efron from Bar Ilan University in Tel Aviv. On the first pages of his essay, he makes it clear that there is a kind of consensus among historians that Christianity&#8217;s role was &#8216;crucial&#8217; in the development of science. What then, is his point in debunking the myth that Christianity gave birth to modern science? Efron apparently tries to walk a fine line between considering Christianity irrelevant or damaging to science on one side and giving it too much credit on the other. This kind of message doesn&#8217;t lend itself well to a format that gives the impression of bluntly debunking a myth. In this case, the book&#8217;s format is hindering the message of the author.</p>
<p>The book discusses twenty-five myths. Out of these, I counted seventeen that are most likely to be held by atheists. The theme that runs through these is: Christianity was not destroyed by science and has never been in conflict with science. This is not an easy message when publishing a book with the words &#8216;evolution&#8217; and &#8216;religion&#8217; in its title will bring you death threats, as neurologist David Linden once stated during a lecture. However, hostilities from christians towards science are not typical for history and that should mean something to everyone. Nobody can prescribe exactly how history should be translated to personal meaning, but a good understanding is available. <em>Galileo Goes to Jail</em> offers exactly that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bromei.nl/natusaurus/2011/02/a-role-for-history/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No, not everyone.</title>
		<link>http://bromei.nl/natusaurus/2010/03/no-not-everyone/</link>
		<comments>http://bromei.nl/natusaurus/2010/03/no-not-everyone/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 12:15:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Creationism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[History of Science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bromei.nl/natusaurus/?p=66</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A frequent argument made by creationists is that in the past, everyone was a creationist. This is not true; apart from the fact that creationism as we know it now is a recent invention, species being related has in antiquity and medieval times been accepted, like barnacle geese being related to&#8230;well, barnacles. And then there [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A frequent argument made by creationists is that in the past, everyone was a creationist. This is not true; apart from the fact that creationism as we know it now is a recent invention, species being related has in antiquity and medieval times been accepted, like barnacle geese being related to&#8230;well, barnacles. And then there were, according to T-rex, giraffes.<br />
<a href="http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1648"><img src="http://www.qwantz.com/comics/comic2-1671.png"></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bromei.nl/natusaurus/2010/03/no-not-everyone/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

