THE AMALGAMATION OF STRANGE BIRTH FELLOW IN 1914 AND INDIRECT RULE EFFECT IN THE POST-COLONIAL NIGERIA
BY
EKENEME VINCENT CHIBUKE
INTRODUCTION
The country which is now called Nigeria is characterized by different peoples of cultures, traditions, natural resources and many other dynamics attributes. The history of Nigeria can however be traced down to the pre-colonial, colonial and post-colonial era. These stages are characterized by different peoples, events, calamities, displacement of identity and dignity and several other developments and disappointments. The fact remains that these stages of Nigeria formation cannot be overemphasized especially the Colonia era that was the heart of the default setting which Nigeria today is operating
The Berlin conference held from 1884-1885 was the colonization of the African continent by European powers. That Berlin event was the awful of the many evils that besieged her. Africa’s head was shaved in her absence and divided into irregular fragments not considering language, culture or traditions.
In the bid to mention the irrationality of the amalgamation, it has been called many names in Nigerian history such as a celebration of slavery, a historic fraud, a merging of opposites and so forth. Just as the Berlin Conference was Africa’s undoing in more ways than one, one of which even by the time independence returned to Africa in 1950, the realm had acquired a legacy of political fragmentation that could neither be eliminated nor made to operate satisfactorily, amalgamation too has not left the best tidings on the Nigerian socializations and politics. The first pointer to the irrationality of the amalgamation is that fact that it was not even legal. It was done illegally even though it followed the spirit of the Berlin Fathers, it wasn’t legally done. Tayo Oke argues that “My search through the United Kingdom Parliamentary archives did not reveal any promulgation of an Act of Parliament on the subject as it should have…Lord Lugard had simply prevailed on the Secretary of State to rubber stamp his wish to rule over a vast swathe of land which he had christened Nigeria. However, we cannot blame the amalgamation for all the current ills we are experiencing now as many claim. A brief retrospection into Nigerian annals proved that the amalgamation of the south and north was not the first merging and in fact after the merging things still went on well.
For the purpose of this work however, a closer outlook will be taken on the effect of amalgamation and indirect rule to the greatest bane of national unity of the country which is now called Nigeria. To dazzle into this elaborate discuss, it will be fitting to elucidate these thematic issues using the following outline:
Clarification of terms
The history of what came to be Nigeria
The Amalgamation in the colonial era
The effect of amalgamation and indirect rule in the post colonial era
Evaluation
Conclusion
CLEARIFICATION OF TERMS
Amalgamation according to Cambridge Dictionary is the process in which separate organizations unite to form a larger organization or group, or an organization or group formed in this way. Amalgamation can also be described as the merging of joining two or littler enterprise or community in order to form a larger one. Although, amalgamation is often used for business enterprise or sector but it has been coined also to be used for community, state and geographical entities. This means that amalgamation can be used for like example to describe the coming together of the communities in order to for one larger community which will enhance more effectiveness. Amalgamation of the Southern and the Northern region of Nigeria can be referring to as joining the two regions together.
Similarly, Colonialism is the establishment, exploitation, maintenance, acquisition, and expansion of colony in one territory by a political power from another territory. It is a set of unequal relationships between the colonial power and the colony and often between the colonists and the indigenous population. The European colonial period was the era from the 16th century to the mid-20th century when several European powers (particularly, but not exclusively, Portugal, Spain, Britain, the Netherlands, Russia, and France) established colonies in Asia, Africa, and the Americas. At first the countries followed mercantilist policies designed to strengthen the home economy at the expense of rivals, soothe colonies were usually allowed to trade only with the mother country. By the mid-19th century, however, the powerful British Empire gave up mercantilism and trade restrictions and introduced the principle of free trade, with few restrictions or tariffs.
Collins English Dictionary defines colonialism as "the policy and practice of a power in extending control over weaker people or areas.” The Merriam-Webster Dictionary offers four definitions, including "something characteristic of a colony" and "control by one power over a dependent area or people." The 2006 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy "uses the term 'colonialism' to describe the process of European settlement and political control over the rest of the world, including Americas, Australia, and parts of Africa and Asia." It discusses the distinction between colonialism and imperialism and states that "given the difficulty of consistently distinguishing between the two terms, this entry will use colonialism as a broad concept that refers to the project of European political domination from the sixteenth to the twentieth century’s that ended with the national liberation movements of the 1960s.
The colonialism in African down to Nigeria can therefore be divided in ti three different parts; the pre colonial period, the colonial period which lasted from 1900 to 1960, an lastly the post colonial period which was invented after amalgamation and independence of the state. In 1900, the Niger Coast Protectorate and some territories of the Royal Niger Company were united to form the Southern Nigeria Protectorate, while other Royal Niger Company territories became the Northern Nigeria Protectorate. In 1914, the Northern and Southern Nigeria Protectorates were unified into the Colony and Protectorate of Nigeria while maintaining considerable regional autonomy among the three major regions. Progressive constitutions after World War II provided for increasing representation and electoral government by Nigerians. In October 1, 1960, Nigeria gained independence.
Also, ' strange bed fellow' is a form of coined phrase or idiom which means that If two people or groups make strange bedfellows, they are connected in a particular activity though they are very different and would not usually have the same opinions or be seen together. It can also mean People who would normally dislike and avoid one another will work together if they think it is politically useful to do so. This proverb therefore describes the amalgamation of the Northern region and the Southern region of what came to be Nigeria.
THE HISTORY OF WHAT CAME TO BE NIGERIA
Nigeria was a creation of the British colonial adventurer and empire builder. The March for markets, raw materials and the need to exert political influence overseas led Britain to journey to places as distant as Wikki in present day Borno State. To the Northwest, Sokoto came under her influence too. Deriving the name Nigeria from the word 'Niger' - the name of the river that constitutes the most remarkable geographical feature, the colonial master coupled together the diverse peoples North and South of the river and its tributary the Benue into a modem nation- state. The vegetation in tile South is predominantly rain forest, but moving northwards one finds a belt of savannah and scrubland which gives way to the Sahara Desert. From across the desert came the earliest external influence to reach some of the areas now part of Nigeria. That was Islamic faith and ideas which began to filter from North Africa, first into Kanern- Bornu. The Niger River, the name from which Nigeria is coined, empties into the Bights of Benin and Bonny, through an intricate network of Delta characterized by a thick mangrove which the British ventured in order to get prized items of trade in the nineteenth century. But this was after the trade in slaves had been outlawed in 1833.
SLAVE TRADE: The external influence resulting from this trade brought tremendous impact on Nigeria. From the late 15th Century, Europeans began frequenting the Bights of Benin (now the Bights of Bonny), in search of tropical products and slaves.
By the eighteenth century, the ports of Nigerian coastlines, mainly Lagos, Brass, Bonny and Old Calahar, had become centers of the trans-atlantics slave trade. Trade routes from these ports extended through the communities of the South to the Hausa States. But the industrial revolution and the advent of the machine made the trade unnecessary and unprofitable. The aftermath was an increased interest in palm oil trade. In 1849, the British Government appointed John Beecroft as the Governor of Bights of Benin and Bonny His job was to regulate commercial relations with the coastal city States. Backed by fierce gunboats, he interfered with the internal affairs of these States and the process which culminated in the imposition of colonial rule came afoot.
There were also missionary interests at play. In 1861, Lagos was proclaimed crown colony. And through the initiative of the United Africa Company, formed by George Goldie, through an amalgamation of British firms in 1879, most of the parts which became Northern Nigeria were preserved as British sphere to the chagrin of French and German competitors. The Company received a charter to administer it until 1899 when the charter was revoked, and tile British Government administered it directly, under the name "Protectorate of Northern Nigeria" The Delta Area had itself been proclaimed the Oil Rivers Protectorate, following the signing of a number of treaties between the local rulers and British consular officials. Finally, in 1914, the two British administrations were merged, to form a single territorial unit known as Nigeria. This territory was administered by the British until 1960 when the Union Jack (British flag) was lowered for the Nigeria flag to take its place. From the point of view of the evolution of the Nigerian state, the most significant thing about the 1954 Constitution, which remained in force until Independence in 1960, was that the Lugardian principle of centralization was replaced by the formula of decentralization as a matter of policy in the administration of the Nigerian state.
THE AMAGAMATION IN THE COLONIAL ERA
The eventual amalgamation of Nigeria on January 1, 1914, was as much the outgrowth of the extant global order as well as evolving policy of Britain that claimed this part of the continent for itself. Much of the parts now known as Nigeria were recognized to have come under British influence by other colonial powers at the 1884 Berlin Conference. British citizens as missionaries or traders thereafter became more active in the areas which peoples didn’t know Britain as much as Britain knew them. And it wasn’t as if there was a truckload of knowledge of what Britain knew about most of these areas before 1900 to make it claim full ownership (apart from places where treaties had been signed with local rulers, or armed expedition had taken place). For as late as 1920, colonial officials continued to go into the interior, collecting information on tribal history and making maps of places that the then international system had long conceded to Britain. And of course a close look at the vast productive savannah, forested and water areas that Britain claimed, while it ignored the vast desert all around, showed why this part was a big prize which Britain in the pre-1900 period held under three different administrations namely; the Niger Coast Protectorate, Niger Sudan Protectorate, and Colony of Lagos.
Back in 1896, Sir Ralph Moor, the Consul-General of the Niger Coast Protectorate, had complained to the Foreign Office in London about the different fiscal policies among the various parts of the British territory. Moor said the policies were detrimental to commercial development. Jealous of the Royal Niger Company and its dominance in trade, Liverpool Chamber of Commerce also wrote London, suggesting the unification of the three territories. What the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Lord Chamberlain, with the Foreign Office did by setting up a committee to consider the request was typical of bureaucracy; it was a step that would delay the bringing together of all parts of Queen Victoria’s territory and make Nigerians of 2014 link that general period in their nation’s history more closely to the name of one man – Lord Frederick D. Lugard. Now, Lugard remains such a huge figure. And it’s not just in Nigeria where he looms large in colonial history, but in Britain’s pre-second world war colonial establishment. So, it’s in order if some attention is paid to the man who was appointed by the British political establishment to bring about the amalgamation of Nigeria.
Lugard was born Frederick John Dealtry Lugard on January 22, 1858. His journey through life cast him on marble as a soldier, explorer of Africa and colonial administrator, Governor of Hong Kong (1907–1912) and Governor-General of Nigeria (1914–1919). And he was much more. He was born in Madras (now Chennai) in India to the Reverend Frederick Grueber Lugard, a British Army Chaplain at Madras. He was raised in Worcester, England, educated at Rossall School and the Royal Military College, Sandhurst, an institution many Nigerian military officers would latter attend. Lugard was commissioned into the 9th Foot (East Norfolk Regiment) in 1878, joining the second battalion in India. He served in the Afghan War in1879–1880, Sudan campaign in1884–1885, and in the Third Burmese War in 1886–1887. In May 1888, he took command of an expedition organized by the British settlers in Nyasaland against Arab slave traders on Lake Nyasa and was severely wounded. After he left Nyasaland in April 1889, Lugard joined the British East Africa Company.
In 1890, he was sent by the company to Uganda, where he secured British predominance of the area and put an end to the civil disturbances. After his successful efforts, Lugard became Military Administrator of Uganda from December 26, 1890 to May 1892. When he returned to England in 1892, he dissuaded Prime Minister William Ewart Gladstone and his
Cabinet from abandoning Uganda. In 1894, he was dispatched by the Royal Niger Company to Borgu, where he secured treaties with the kings and chiefs acknowledging the sovereignty of the British company, while distancing other colonial powers that were there. From 1896 to 1897, Lugard took charge of an expedition to Lake Ngami on behalf of the British West Charterland Company. From Ngami he was recalled by the British government and sent to West Africa where he was commissioned to raise a native force to protect British interests in the hinterland of the Lagos Colony and Nigeria against French aggression. In August 1897, he organized the West African Frontier Force, and commanded it until the end of December 1899.
In 1900, the British government took over direct control of the parts under the Royal Nigeria Company. Lugard had relinquished command of the West African Frontier Force, and was made High Commissioner of the Protectorate of Northern Nigeria. He was made Knight Commander of the Order of St Michael and St George (KCMG) in 1901 and raised to a Knight Grand Cross (GCMG) in 1911 from which time until 1928 he was addressed as Sir Frederick Lugard. In 1928, he was elevated to the peerage as Baron Lugard (and called Lord) which could not be transferred to a descendant when he died because his marriage to Flora Shaw did not yield a son. Meanwhile, Lugard remained at his post as the High Commissioner of the Protectorate of Northern Nigeria until 1906. During that time, his military officers had to engage in various expeditions to secure large portions of Northern Nigeria from the North-West to the North-East, a process officially referred to as pacification. Lugard left for Hong Kong in 1906 by which time Nigeria was increasingly being peacefully administered under the supervision of British residents who presided over each of the Provinces into which Northern Nigeria had been divided. A year after he resigned as High Commissioner of the Protectorate of Northern Nigeria, he was appointed as Governor of Hong Kong, a position he held until March 1912 when he returned to Nigeria with the title of Governor of the two protectorates of Northern and Southern Nigeria. Main objective of his appointment was to work out the amalgamation of the North and South into one administrative entity. And from 1914 when he formally achieved this till 1919 when he left for London, Lugard had the title of Governor-General of the united territories.
Back in London, he was appointed to the Privy Council, entitling him to style himself “The Right Honorable” in the 1920 New Year Honours. His written work continued to make him a name to reckon with in the British colonial establishment. He had earlier published The Rise of our East African Empire in 1893 which was partially an autobiography. He also had various reports on Northern Nigeria, so valued by the Colonial Office that it had them published. And The Dual Mandate in British Tropical Africa published in 1922 would further establish him as a household name in British colonial enterprise. He discusses indirect rule in colonial Africa in this book, outlining the reasons and methods for the colonization of Africa. Part of his justifications includes spreading of Christianity; meanwhile he sees state-sponsored colonization as a way to protect missionaries, local chiefs and local people from themselves. From 1922 to 1936 he was British representative on the League of Nations’ Permanent Mandates Commission. During this period he served first on the Temporary Slavery Commission and was involved in organizing the 1926 Slavery Convention. Lugard also served on the International Labour Organization’s Committee of Experts on Native Labour from 1925 to 1941. He died on April 11, 1945.
THE EFFECT OF AMAGAMATION
On January 1, 2015, it will be 101 years since the colonial rubber baron, Lord Frederick John Dealtry Lugard (1858-1945), made the audacious decision to bring what was then the Northern part of the Niger (area) in unison with the Southern part, to create what we have today as Nigeria. Before then, the two protectorates lived as distinct and separate entities; not having much in common. Lugard, however, felt it expedient to create the new country, Nigeria, purely for administrative convenience. No account was taken of differences in culture, tradition, religion, way of life or, for that matter, and the wishes of the people being so rudely submerged. After all, the inhabitants of the protectorates were colonial subjects, and so, it was left to the master to do as he pleased. This singular colonial fiat has been the source and fountain of Nigeria’s persistent crisis of nationhood ever since. Thus, the Federal Government’s plan to throw up a huge party to “celebrate” the centenary of this forced merger, next year, is bizarre and ill-advised. Of course, the act of drawing up arbitrary boundaries and creating new state territories are not such a unique thing to Nigeria.
As a matter of fact, the whole of modern African states were created in exactly the same fashion at the Berlin Conference of European powers in 1885. They sat around a long, round table with the boundary-less map of Africa in the middle, and started carving up the territories into choice names: Cameroon (Land of shrimps), Gold Coast (Land of gold), Ivory Coast (Land of ivories), Upper Volta, Kenya, Mali, among others. That is how modern African states acquired their identities. It is a painful part of African history. That is why no one proposed the centenary celebration of the Berlin Conference in 1995. The 1914 amalgamation of Nigeria was an unfinished business from ‘Berlin 1885’. It therefore defies logic that right-thinking Nigerians would want to turn that into a cause célèbre. Perhaps, more than just the funfair planned by the Federal Government is the more pressing issue of the legality of the amalgamation itself. My search through the United Kingdom Parliamentary archives did not reveal any promulgation of an Act of Parliament on the subject as it should have.
Lord Lugard presented a series of “reports”, one of which was published in May 1913 in which “the Secretary of State has decided that the combined territories of Northern and Southern Nigeria, divided into two or more subsidiary administrations, shall be placed under the control of a single Governor-General…” Lugard had simply prevailed on the Secretary of State to rubber stamp his wish to rule over a vast swathe of land which he had christened Nigeria. The next occasion of historical significance that took place in relation to this was when Lugard actually delivered the “Amalgamation speech” on the “amalgamation day of January 1, 1914”. He boldly announced to the world, based on his agreement. With the Secretary of State the previous year, his “desire therefore as briefly as possible to describe to his audience, and through them to the official and unofficial community of Nigeria the basis on which this Amalgamation is to be carried out…’’
The basis, of course, was to facilitate the continued exploitation of the people and their natural resources. Let’s not forget, this was done as World War 1 was just breaking out, Parliamentary process was thus dispensed with. It is my submission, therefore, that a Nigerian court of competent jurisdiction can and should be given the opportunity to rule on the said amalgamation. Committed eminent Nigerian lawyers could, if they choose to, seek a judicial review of the decision to amalgamate as soon as it is practicable to do so. A declaration that the decision is null and void should usher in an immediate convocation of a Sovereign National Conference to give Nigerians the long awaited say on this most vexed of all issues. Having said that, I can hear discordant voices saying; ‘leave well alone; let it be; the fraud was perpetrated long time ago; it’s an act of God; it’s our destiny to be together, among others. These voices are well-meaning, but wrong in a fundamental respect.
In 1707, the previously disagreeable Kingdoms of Scotland and England were merged by King James a Scottish Monarch, and was later ratified by Scottish and English Parliaments when they both met for the first time in October 1707. There lies the basis of the United Kingdom as we know it today. Why was this precedent not applied to the amalgamation of Nigeria over 200 years later? Nonetheless, parliamentary legitimacy notwithstanding, the “Act of Union” between Scotland and England has been a running sore in the hearts of many Scots for a long time. With its population of just over five million compared to England’s 53 million (or 84 per cent of the total UK population), Scottish nationalist leaders have long felt “sub- merged” and “marginalized” within the UK although, this may be more apparent than real to an outside observer. Nonetheless, because this feeling runs deep, it was given political expression by the formation of the Scottish Nationalist Party in 1934. Why can’t, for instance, Boko Haram members be allowed to express their political grievances through a legitimate political party with the sole aim of establishing a Sharia state in the Northern region for that matter? Why not? Once you have feelings of “injustice” running so deep, and being so visceral, it needs to be given democratic expression or, the people will resort to violence.
Anyway, back to Scotland. The SNP was berated and shunned for much of its early existence, until it gradually began to win the hearts and minds of the Scottish people. It won its first parliamentary seat in 1945, then, substantially increased its representation in 1974 with 11 Members of Parliament, before finally becoming the majority in Scottish Parliament in 2007. The partys mantra since formation has remained full independence for Scotland and a break away from the UK. Guess what?
The UK Parliament has now agreed a referendum of the Scottish people to take place in 2014 to determine whether Scotland should opt out of the UK and re-start life as an independent entity. The campaign has already started between pro and anti independence camps. It promises to be lively and enlightening. My haunch is that there will be a narrow victory for those who wish to remain in the UK and the nationalist fervor would have been extinguished for the foreseeable future. The question for us in Nigeria is why are we afraid of an open democratic debate about the terms of our existence as a state? Why is this type of debate encouraged in Western countries as a mark of political maturity and it is discouraged in our society as heresy? Why do we want to spend a trillion naira bringing out dance troupes and masqueraders next year to celebrate the centenary of an amalgamation, which to all intent and purposes is a legal infamy? Our leaders appear to have taken leave of their senses with this one. Let’s hope common sense will eventually prevail.
Nigeria’s tragedy is that its people, particularly its leaders, have not been able to turn the potentials offered by the amalgamation of 1914 into enduring benefits. The amalgamation brought Nigeria’s constituent nationalities into a melting pot that was intended to distil its disparate peoples into one united country. Nigerians have so far been unable to birth a more united nation out of the crucible of amalgamation. That failure has nothing to do with Lugard, or with the amalgamation. It is primarily a failure of Nigeria’s leaders – especially the triumvirate that led Nigeria to independence. For all their brilliance and erudition, none of those three – Awolowo, Ahmadu Bello and Azikiwe – can be called a father of the nation. They did more for their tribes than they ever did for Nigeria. They were all sadly incapable of forming a nation.
At the end of their two decade control of Nigeria’s politics from 1946 to 1966, these men had managed to create a country whose inhabitants identified themselves first as members of their regions and ethnicities, before they were citizens of Nigeria. It must be conceded that the three leaders of the Nigerian nation created fully functional and effective regional governments. The period of their leadership of their various regions has been unrivalled since, in terms of the real growth engendered in schools, public health facilities, public infrastructure, and economic development. As Nigeria enters into its second centennial, the question that still lingers in every mind is whether the Nigerian nation will make it. Will this marriage survive? There are two answers to that question. If Nigeria continues along its current path, where charlatans and ethnic jingoists jostle for power and place their interests above that of the nation; Nigeria will die, if not a sudden death, then a slow, painful death that will include bloodshed and internecine strife. However, if leaders who are genuine in their intentions and nationalistic in their outlook emerge, and find a way to win the confidence of the Nigerian people, a strong and virile Nigeria will yet emerge.
The fact remains that the imbalance of the so called amalgamation has created a kind of default setting which project imbalance and injustice, for this very fact, the effect has continued to affect the developmental growth of the people and has continue to kill the search for unity in the country.
EVALUATION
To say 1914 Amalgamation was perfect will be the greatest fallacy one will likely commit in life. Similarly, to also say there is nothing good in the amalgamation will be wrong as well. The fact remains that the amalgamation has created a kind of imbalance default setting for what is called Nigeria today am we will continue to operate on this setting until we decide to restore the factory and go back to the missing point and try to get it right. Injustice and racial barrier as really destroyed the rope of unity in this country and this is simply because of the very grievous intentional mistake that has been committed by our so called colonial imperialist and our indirect rulers of the past.
Similarly, Nigeria is a very complex country. Our problems did not start yesterday. It started about 1894. Lord Lugard came here about 1894 and many people did not know that Major Lugard was not originally employed by the British government. He was employed by companies. He was first employed by East Indian Company, by the Royal East African Company and then by the Royal Niger Company. It was from the Royal Niger Company that he transferred to the British government. Unless you know this background, you will not know the root causes of our problems. The interest of the Europeans in Africa and indeed in Nigeria was economic and it’s still economic. They have no permanent friends and no permanent interest. Neither their interest nor their friends are permanent. Nigeria was created as British sphere of interests for business.
The fact that the amalgamation was not instituted with the interest of Nigerians at heart does not imply that there was nothing about amalgamation that could benefit the inhabitants of the newly formed nation that became known as Nigeria. Was there anything about the amalgamation of 1914 that enhanced any movements towards unity that Nigerians were themselves already working towards? Were there any attempts by the peoples of the lands now known as Nigeria, to forge unions – through peaceful engagement or conquest – with each other prior to Laggard’s actions? Nigeria made sense to the British for the three primary reasons that motivate all expansionist conquests. Firstly, the Nigerian nation offered lands that were rich in minerals, superbly arable and fit for agriculture and animal husbandry; rivers and oceans that teemed with aquatic bounties. Secondly, the Nigerian nation offered inland waterways and unfettered access to seas that allowed for the movement of persons and goods. Thirdly, Nigeria offered an abundance of hardworking and enterprising people who would transform the factors of production with which Nigeria was abundantly blessed, into products and services that could be taxed. Although, one may also conclude that it is out of what they think they can benefit from what we now have as Nigeria that the developed interest in the country and mot for the good of the citizens.
Lastly, the thematic issue of amalgamation is like a double edge sword, it has its own little merits and it advantage but the fact remains that is was built successfully on the foundation of inequality and injustice. This problem lies solely on the colonial imperialist and the indirect rule of that time.
CONCUSION
Nigeria has a track record of tyranny, betrayals, ethnic and religious intolerance, civil war, marginalization, etc. but the question is: if we keep using one injustice to justify another, when will our cycle of stupidity end? Great nations are built by people who allow the past to correct and improve the future, not those who eat up others livers in destructive wars of vengeance and recrimination. No country can ever progress when citizens engage in a perennial ritual of wound-licking and trading scars.
It is not possible for us to solve contemporary religious and communal clashes, riots, conflicts and violence, racial prejudice and injustice in Nigeria without correcting the inherited primordial, religious and cultural, and colonial structures and negative values and redressing these legacies, if contemporary Nigeria is to be reoriented along the paths and principles of justice, equality, freedom and equity in socio-political relationships of all Nigerians in the distribution of national resources, rewards and statuses for the benefit of all by the Governments. (We need to do self-appraisal: what primordial values and structures of inequality and injustice that has crept into the society right from the advent of the country.
Lastly, it is not possible to achieve peace, unity and respect for human dignity and worth of all Nigerians, if we have not personally and collectively made a deliberate effort and commitment to these noble virtues as the primary goal or end of our dialogue and relations among and between people, and ethnic and religious groups. First, we must be committed personally and collectively to peace, unity and human rights and secondly see them as ultimate goals that must be attained before we can even start to deliberate with each other.
Monday, April 20, 2015
MEDIEVAL PHASE OF PHILOSOPHY: A CRITICAL EXPOSE ON SOME THEMATIC MEDIEVAL THINKERS AND THEIR PHILOSOPHICAL STANDPOINTS
MEDIEVAL PHASE OF PHILOSOPHY: A CRITICAL EXPOSE ON SOME THEMATIC MEDIEVAL THINKERS AND THEIR PHILOSOPHICAL STANDPOINTS
BY: EKENEME VINCENT CHIBUKE
Introduction
In the heart of each epoch of philosophy is generally characterized by various thematic issues and philosophers. The prima epoch which is the ancient philosophy focuses on the inquiry to the fundamental stuff of the universe. Down to the medieval era, it engages in using faith and reason to justify the existence of God.
The predominant philosophers in medieval era was however greatly influenced by platonic through his work "new platonic" which has a religious and mythical element. The "new platonic" seems to provide the most convenient intellectual support for religious doctrines.
The goal of the medieval philosophy is to provide a respectable philosophical foundation for theological positions. Some medieval thinkers who dominated the epoch were; St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aqinus, Boteus, Anselm, Origin, Averroes, scotus and others.
For the purpose of this work however, a close outlook shall be taken on the influence of of plotinus on four medieval thinkers using the following outlines:
1. The concept and nature of of plotinus
2. The influence of plotinus on the following;
A. St. Augustine
B. Justin
C. Clement of Alexandra
D. Origen
3. Evaluation
4. Conclusion
The concept and nature of of plotinus
Neoplatonism is the modern term for a school of philosophy that took shape in the thirth century with the philosopher known as plotinus. Plotinus who was born around 103 AD had great influence of plato and also philosophers like protagoras, herclitus, aristotle and others in his work.
The doctrine of plotinus begins with the doctrine of the "one". For him, the one is absolute trascedence. The one trascends the human existence, thought and other things. The one is absolutely incomprehensible, eternal,immutable, indivisible and has unique distinction from any other being.
For Plotinus' ontology, he placed the ultimate centre and origin of the as the 'one'. This implies that the one is the origin of all the source of diversity in the world. Another divine being according to Plotinus is the 'Nous' which also means mind or spirit emanated from the one as a matter of necessity. Mind is the closest being to the one and it is eternal. Soul is another divine spirit which emanated from the mind and it is divided into higher and lower soul. Both of them however are interconnected to the Nous and the Nature.
The human soul pre-existed in the spiritual world before it comes to the material world. So, when the soul mingle with the material world it get contaminated and it therefore needs purification before going back to the one.
Augustine
St Augustine is search of truth had found what he believed to be a true presentation of reality in what he had read in plato and plotinus work. He had time to acquire effective knowledge of the philosophy which he now use to justify the claim of the revealed truth of christian theology.
Augustine accepted and conceived the plotinian theory of the 'one' as the equivalent of creation, by his lack of full realization of the utter trascendence of the platonic one and his acceptance of the tree divine hypotheses as a pagan precision of the trinity. He was thus able to apply the second person of the christian trinity to the word, what platonic attributed to the divine mind
Augustine was also influenced by platonic tradition that he held that the object of knowledge are not material, rather they are immutable and eternal. According to plate, these eternal and immutable ideas are in the world of form. However, according to Augustine, they are in the mind of God. Whew we therefore acquire this knowledge, it means our mind perceives this eternal and immutable ideas. This means that the eternal truth and ideas is superior to the human mind. The mind is able to grasp the divine truth through the Divine Illumination.
According to Augustine, he said the human mind is restless unless it finds happiness it seeks. This means that the desire for happiness can be only achieve from the transcendence because happiness itself is eternal and immutable. In relation to the problem of evil, platonic deduct that darkness is privation of light as explained in his theory of the one. Consequently. Augustine refer evil as the privation of good. Evil is not o positive entity no being it is rather a detachment of good. God is awesomely good and as such he cannot create evil, evil evolve as a result of human being moving far away from the light and find himself in darkness.
Justin
Justin tries to ascertain the nature of God using reason and was influenced be the truth of plate philosophy. In justin's opinion, every man, insofar he has reason, participate in some ways in the Divine reason (the eternal logos) which is a universal principle of rationality. This now makes man to have ability and capacity to gather some fragment of truth; a truth which christ has allowed us to know in its entirety.
Justin believes that religion is more sublime than any other human doctrine because christ who has appeared to us men, represent the principle of logos in its totality; in a totality of body logos and soul. Logos is at the centre of justice interest. This logos is not of philosophy, rather they are of christ announced in the scripture. This is the son of God generated by the father, personally distinct from the father without being separated from God,s unity.
Justin profess that he is a Christian and glory not only that plato,s doctrine are dissimilar from those of christ but because of platonic theory of one are not only identical to those of christ. Justin tend to compare philosophy and christenity in relation to the perfect and imperfect, partial and total. Justine reaches this terminus primarily through a reflection of the history of salvation.
Lastly, justine tries to establish the fact that no opposition between philosophy and christening; a natural convergence exist and both progress towards the same truth which is revealed fully in christening, while philosophy reveals itself in a fragmentary and obscure way.
Clement of alexandria
Clement of alexandra who was also refer to as father of christian philosophy did not contend a defense of cause of philosophy. Although he did this fervently, demonstrating how philosophy was chosen by gentiles to prepare christ's coming. He did not only use plate or stoic or platonic to explain christian truth but also accept philosophy as a logical procedure to give a rational character to some fundamental truth.
Clement notion of soul is purely immortal due to the mystery of incarnation. He also ephasizes detachment from passion and pleasure, therefore dedicating our care to the soul. Only soul according to him is closer to God. The mind (Nous) is pure and in a certain way ready to receive God,s potency because his image has been established. Therefore . It is impossible for one to reach the knowledge of God. God according to him is incomprehensible and we cannot know anything in his nature.
Clement slated two motive to justify the doctrine of immortality are more philosophical. Having recognize the truth of christenity and the beatitude it announces one sees that this implies that the soul is immortality.
Clement tries to clarify the properties and attributes distinguishing the 'logos form all divinity worshiped buy the Greek and Romans. The Greek philosophy describe logos as the christ who is the son of God. Clement however describe logos in what he does to communicate his wisdom grace and happiness to man. The nature of the son of God who is the closest to the omnipotent God, who is the most perfect and sacred, exceedingly dominating, regal and beneficent. He is noble and detaches himself from his summit because he is undivided and intact. He is also spirit and paternal light, all eye, speculator and know er of all things.
Origin
Origin supports clement's solution. For clement, there is no state of enmity between philosophy and theology, but that there exist a solidarity and alliance between the two. In his opinion, philosophy plays a favorable role to christian doctrine, both by and after christ coming. Before christ, philosophy prepared the Greek to understand and accept the word 'logos' of revelation. Philosophy for him give an adequate ground for the truth revealed by the word of God.
Origin regarded God as the spiritual (incorrect) and trashcans nature. He also argues for the fact that God is the principle of all things based on simplicity. God for him is the principle of all things and cannot be believed to be composed. Otherwise, the object which make up anything we call composed would be anterior to the principle itself.
God is a simple intellectual nature and he is absolute gonad and from his absolute intelligence come all intelligence substances. God according to him is also absolutely trescedent to the world of matter and his reality is highly incomprehensible and inscrutable. Whatever we think and comprehend of God,We must believe that he is greatly superior to what we think of him. The nature of God is incomprehensible, nevertheless our intelligence can still know little about him through his created realities and to know him as father of all.
According to origin, God created a complex of natural nature in which all are equally good and perfect as it depicts his nature. However, as a result of their good and bad use of freedom of choice, they formed themselves into angel, men and demon. The creator allowed the intelligences to do their own good and preserve their need as well. Due to the negligence of preserving goodness originated for good. To detach oneself from good lead to evil because lack off good. Hence from this free will, there is passage off being from one category to the other; man can become an angel (extremely goodness)or even a demon (evil), so also a demon can become a man ant then a angel.
Evaluative Conclusion
The fact remains the most of the medieval thinkers were greatly influenced by platonic. However some were also influenced by other philosophers who they get acquaintance with. For the fundamental problem of evil however still create a. Vacuum in my heart as I continue to ask that if evil is not created why then does the ultimate God allow it to crept into his good handwork to create chaos? For God, he is an eternal incomprehensible one and it take his grace for man to even comprehend an iota of his created realities.
BY: EKENEME VINCENT CHIBUKE
Introduction
In the heart of each epoch of philosophy is generally characterized by various thematic issues and philosophers. The prima epoch which is the ancient philosophy focuses on the inquiry to the fundamental stuff of the universe. Down to the medieval era, it engages in using faith and reason to justify the existence of God.
The predominant philosophers in medieval era was however greatly influenced by platonic through his work "new platonic" which has a religious and mythical element. The "new platonic" seems to provide the most convenient intellectual support for religious doctrines.
The goal of the medieval philosophy is to provide a respectable philosophical foundation for theological positions. Some medieval thinkers who dominated the epoch were; St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aqinus, Boteus, Anselm, Origin, Averroes, scotus and others.
For the purpose of this work however, a close outlook shall be taken on the influence of of plotinus on four medieval thinkers using the following outlines:
1. The concept and nature of of plotinus
2. The influence of plotinus on the following;
A. St. Augustine
B. Justin
C. Clement of Alexandra
D. Origen
3. Evaluation
4. Conclusion
The concept and nature of of plotinus
Neoplatonism is the modern term for a school of philosophy that took shape in the thirth century with the philosopher known as plotinus. Plotinus who was born around 103 AD had great influence of plato and also philosophers like protagoras, herclitus, aristotle and others in his work.
The doctrine of plotinus begins with the doctrine of the "one". For him, the one is absolute trascedence. The one trascends the human existence, thought and other things. The one is absolutely incomprehensible, eternal,immutable, indivisible and has unique distinction from any other being.
For Plotinus' ontology, he placed the ultimate centre and origin of the as the 'one'. This implies that the one is the origin of all the source of diversity in the world. Another divine being according to Plotinus is the 'Nous' which also means mind or spirit emanated from the one as a matter of necessity. Mind is the closest being to the one and it is eternal. Soul is another divine spirit which emanated from the mind and it is divided into higher and lower soul. Both of them however are interconnected to the Nous and the Nature.
The human soul pre-existed in the spiritual world before it comes to the material world. So, when the soul mingle with the material world it get contaminated and it therefore needs purification before going back to the one.
Augustine
St Augustine is search of truth had found what he believed to be a true presentation of reality in what he had read in plato and plotinus work. He had time to acquire effective knowledge of the philosophy which he now use to justify the claim of the revealed truth of christian theology.
Augustine accepted and conceived the plotinian theory of the 'one' as the equivalent of creation, by his lack of full realization of the utter trascendence of the platonic one and his acceptance of the tree divine hypotheses as a pagan precision of the trinity. He was thus able to apply the second person of the christian trinity to the word, what platonic attributed to the divine mind
Augustine was also influenced by platonic tradition that he held that the object of knowledge are not material, rather they are immutable and eternal. According to plate, these eternal and immutable ideas are in the world of form. However, according to Augustine, they are in the mind of God. Whew we therefore acquire this knowledge, it means our mind perceives this eternal and immutable ideas. This means that the eternal truth and ideas is superior to the human mind. The mind is able to grasp the divine truth through the Divine Illumination.
According to Augustine, he said the human mind is restless unless it finds happiness it seeks. This means that the desire for happiness can be only achieve from the transcendence because happiness itself is eternal and immutable. In relation to the problem of evil, platonic deduct that darkness is privation of light as explained in his theory of the one. Consequently. Augustine refer evil as the privation of good. Evil is not o positive entity no being it is rather a detachment of good. God is awesomely good and as such he cannot create evil, evil evolve as a result of human being moving far away from the light and find himself in darkness.
Justin
Justin tries to ascertain the nature of God using reason and was influenced be the truth of plate philosophy. In justin's opinion, every man, insofar he has reason, participate in some ways in the Divine reason (the eternal logos) which is a universal principle of rationality. This now makes man to have ability and capacity to gather some fragment of truth; a truth which christ has allowed us to know in its entirety.
Justin believes that religion is more sublime than any other human doctrine because christ who has appeared to us men, represent the principle of logos in its totality; in a totality of body logos and soul. Logos is at the centre of justice interest. This logos is not of philosophy, rather they are of christ announced in the scripture. This is the son of God generated by the father, personally distinct from the father without being separated from God,s unity.
Justin profess that he is a Christian and glory not only that plato,s doctrine are dissimilar from those of christ but because of platonic theory of one are not only identical to those of christ. Justin tend to compare philosophy and christenity in relation to the perfect and imperfect, partial and total. Justine reaches this terminus primarily through a reflection of the history of salvation.
Lastly, justine tries to establish the fact that no opposition between philosophy and christening; a natural convergence exist and both progress towards the same truth which is revealed fully in christening, while philosophy reveals itself in a fragmentary and obscure way.
Clement of alexandria
Clement of alexandra who was also refer to as father of christian philosophy did not contend a defense of cause of philosophy. Although he did this fervently, demonstrating how philosophy was chosen by gentiles to prepare christ's coming. He did not only use plate or stoic or platonic to explain christian truth but also accept philosophy as a logical procedure to give a rational character to some fundamental truth.
Clement notion of soul is purely immortal due to the mystery of incarnation. He also ephasizes detachment from passion and pleasure, therefore dedicating our care to the soul. Only soul according to him is closer to God. The mind (Nous) is pure and in a certain way ready to receive God,s potency because his image has been established. Therefore . It is impossible for one to reach the knowledge of God. God according to him is incomprehensible and we cannot know anything in his nature.
Clement slated two motive to justify the doctrine of immortality are more philosophical. Having recognize the truth of christenity and the beatitude it announces one sees that this implies that the soul is immortality.
Clement tries to clarify the properties and attributes distinguishing the 'logos form all divinity worshiped buy the Greek and Romans. The Greek philosophy describe logos as the christ who is the son of God. Clement however describe logos in what he does to communicate his wisdom grace and happiness to man. The nature of the son of God who is the closest to the omnipotent God, who is the most perfect and sacred, exceedingly dominating, regal and beneficent. He is noble and detaches himself from his summit because he is undivided and intact. He is also spirit and paternal light, all eye, speculator and know er of all things.
Origin
Origin supports clement's solution. For clement, there is no state of enmity between philosophy and theology, but that there exist a solidarity and alliance between the two. In his opinion, philosophy plays a favorable role to christian doctrine, both by and after christ coming. Before christ, philosophy prepared the Greek to understand and accept the word 'logos' of revelation. Philosophy for him give an adequate ground for the truth revealed by the word of God.
Origin regarded God as the spiritual (incorrect) and trashcans nature. He also argues for the fact that God is the principle of all things based on simplicity. God for him is the principle of all things and cannot be believed to be composed. Otherwise, the object which make up anything we call composed would be anterior to the principle itself.
God is a simple intellectual nature and he is absolute gonad and from his absolute intelligence come all intelligence substances. God according to him is also absolutely trescedent to the world of matter and his reality is highly incomprehensible and inscrutable. Whatever we think and comprehend of God,We must believe that he is greatly superior to what we think of him. The nature of God is incomprehensible, nevertheless our intelligence can still know little about him through his created realities and to know him as father of all.
According to origin, God created a complex of natural nature in which all are equally good and perfect as it depicts his nature. However, as a result of their good and bad use of freedom of choice, they formed themselves into angel, men and demon. The creator allowed the intelligences to do their own good and preserve their need as well. Due to the negligence of preserving goodness originated for good. To detach oneself from good lead to evil because lack off good. Hence from this free will, there is passage off being from one category to the other; man can become an angel (extremely goodness)or even a demon (evil), so also a demon can become a man ant then a angel.
Evaluative Conclusion
The fact remains the most of the medieval thinkers were greatly influenced by platonic. However some were also influenced by other philosophers who they get acquaintance with. For the fundamental problem of evil however still create a. Vacuum in my heart as I continue to ask that if evil is not created why then does the ultimate God allow it to crept into his good handwork to create chaos? For God, he is an eternal incomprehensible one and it take his grace for man to even comprehend an iota of his created realities.
THE RISE OF SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION IN MODERN PHASE OF PHILOSOPHICAL ENQUIRY
THE RISE OF SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION IN MODERN PHASE OF PHILOSOPHICAL ENQUIRY
BY: EKENEME VINCENT CHIBUKE
INTRODUCTION
The mismatch between common representations of “science” and the miscellany of ma- terials typically studied by the historian of science is traced to a systematic ambiguity that may itself be traced to early modern Europe. In that cultural setting, natural philosophy came to be rearticulated (most famously by Francis Bacon) as involving both contemplative and practical knowledge. The resulting tension and ambiguity are illustrated by the eighteenth-century views of Buffon. In the nineteenth century, a new enterprise called “science” represents the establishment of an unstable ideology of natural knowledge that was heavily indebted to those early modern developments. The two complementary and competing elements of the ideology of modern science are accordingly described as “natural philosophy” (a discourse of contemplative knowledge) and “instrumentality” (a discourse of practical or useful knowledge; know-how). The history of science in large part concerns the story of their shifting, often mutually denying, interrelations.
Science is a body of empirical, theoretical, and practical knowledge about the natural world, produced by scientists who emphasize the observation, explanation, and prediction of real world phenomena. Historiography of science, in contrast, often draws on the historical method sof both intellectual history and social history.The English word scientist is relatively recent—first coined by William Whewell in the 19th century. Previously, people investigating nature called themselves natural philosophers.While empirical investigations of the natural world have been described since classical antiquity (for example, by Thales, Aristotle, and others), and scientific methods have been employed since the Middle Ages (for example, by Ibnal-Haytham, and Roger Bacon), the dawn of modern scienceis often traced back to the early modern period and in particular to the scientific revolution that took place in 16th- and 17th-century Europe.
Furthermore, the historical tren or modern. Science can said to av started aroune 17th century to 20th century. This period was however characterised by different scientists, such as Francis Bacon, Albert Einstein Coprenicles Galileo, Newton and others. Also, scientific methods are considered to be so fundamental to modern science that some consider earlier inquiries into nature to be pre-scientific.[1] Traditionally, historians of science have defined science sufficiently broadly to include those inquiries.[2] From the 18th century through late 20th century, the history of science, especially of the physical and biological sciences, was often presented in a progressive narrative in which true theories replaced false beliefs.
For the purpose of the work however a closer outlook sha be taken on the historical tragetory of morden science that took place within 18th century and 20th century respectively. To dazzle into the discussion, it will be fitting to take into consideration this outline which will guide the expose:
The history and nature of science
The history and rise of modern Science
The history of Francis Bacon and his science
Renaissance reformation of modern science
Galileo science
Albert Einstein and his science
The relevance of science
Evaluation
Conclusion
NATURE AND HISTORY OF SCIENCE
Science is a body of empirical and theoretical knowledge, produced by a global community of researchers, making use of specific techniques for the observation and explanation of real phenomena, this techne as a whole being summed up under the heading of scientific method. As such, the history of science draws on the historical methods of both intellectual history and social history.The Scientific Revolution of the sixteenth and early seventeenth century saw the inception of modern scientific methods to guide the evaluation of knowledge. This change is considered to be so fundamental that some especially philosophers of science and practicing scientists consider such earlier inquiries into nature to be pre-scientific. Traditionally, historians of science have defined science sufficiently broadly to include those inquiry.
The scientific revolution was built upon the foundation of ancient Greek learning and science in the Middle Ages, as it had been elaborated and further developed by Roman/ Byzantine science and medieval Islamic science.[5] Some scholars have noted a direct tie between "particular aspects of traditional Christianity" and the rise of science.[16][17] The "Aristotelian tradition" was still an important intellectual framework in by the 17th century, although by that time natural philosophers had moved away from much of it.[4] Key scientific ideas dating back to classical antiquity had changed drastically over the years, and in many cases been discredited.[4] The ideas that remained, which were. transformed fundamentally during the scientific revolution, include:
Aristotle's cosmology that placed the Earth at the center of a spherical hierarchic cosmos. The terrestrial and celestial regions were made up of different elements which had different kinds of natural movement.
The terrestrial region, according to Aristotle, consisted of concentric spheres of the four elements—earth, water, air, and fire. All bodies naturally moved in straight lines until they reached the sphere appropriate to their elemental composition—their natural place. All other. terrestrial motions were non-natural, or violent.[18][19]
The celestial region was made up of the fifth element, aether, which was unchanging and moved naturally with uniform circular motion.[20] In the Aristotelian tradition, astronomical theories sought to explain the observed irregular motion of celestial objects through the combined effects of multiple uniform circular motions.[21]
Down to the 18th century, the history of the philosophy of science began to see the first real development in a specific scientific method that would distinguish it from non-sciences. It is difficult, even now, to give a definition of science, and it is perhaps more fruitful to define what it is not, a process started by the philosopher Christian Huygens (1629 - 1695). He argued that science and mathematics were actually different fields, and could not be treated the same way. The distinction he made between the two was the idea of proof. He stated that mathematics and geometry could prove something beyond doubt, whereas science can never prove something emphatically; merely give a probability that a certain finding is true.
Huygens was the first proponent of the hypothetico- deductive method, where a scientist proposes a hypothesis and then tries to deduce the probability that it is correct, through observational and empirical observation. This built upon the work of Bacon, but also developed the idea that scientists could approach the truth by constantly refining experiments and increasing the probability of their hypothesis being correct. This period saw the first divergence of the history of the philosophy of science from metaphysical philosophy.
At this time, Newton also entered the fray, initially possessing a divergent view from Huygens, possibly because of his differing viewpoint as a mathematician. He did not advocate hypotheses, believing that any research using a hypothesis could not be scientific. Newton argued that any scientific undertaking should begin with analysis, where a scholar performed observations and experiments and then made conclusions depending upon he results. His viewpoint was christened synthesis, where these inductive conclusions should be applied to the universe as a whole, to build up a model of the universe. Newton was also an example of a scientist/philosopher who believed that the almighty was behind every process in theuniverse, and that it was too complex to be explained by physics alone.
THE HISTORY AND RISE OF MODERN SCIENCE
The scientific revolution was the emergence of modern science during the early modern period, when developments in mathematics, physics, astronomy, biology (including human anatomy) and chemistry transformed views of society and nature. [1][2][3][4][5][6] The scientific revolution began in Europe towards the end of the Renaissance period and continued through the late 18th century, influencing the intellectual social movement known as the Enlightenment. While its dates are disputed, the publication in 1543 of Nicolaus Copernicus's De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres) is often cited as marking the beginning of
the scientific revolution, and its completion is attributed to the "grand synthesis" of Newton's 1687 Principia. By the end of the 18th century, the scientific revolution had given way to the " Age of Reflection".
The concept of a scientific revolution taking place over an extended period emerged in the eighteenth century in the work of Bailly, who saw a two-stage process of sweeping
away the old and establishing the new.At the start of the 18th century, natural philosophy had not yet separated itself entirely from alchemy, folk tales, or magic, and there was no clear separation between science and religion, as the career of Newton confirms (1). Nor
was there any clear demarcation between philosophy and science. Whether the new direction in natural philosophy should base itself, following Descartes, on the Continental tradition of rationalism (deductive systems) with mathematics at the center of the inquiry or, following Bacon, on empiricism (experiment and observation) or on some appropriate combination of the two was a constant and disputatious concern. Thus, there was no consensus on how the scores of scientific theories should be evaluated, no prevailing "correct" scientific procedure.
However, those promoting new ways of thinking in science, for all their differences, had one important similarity: they were reacting against a long tradition in natural philosophy, seeking to discover a different way of understanding the. natural world. This old tradition originated with the Ancient Greeks and had been appropriated with important modifications by Christian thinkers in the Middle Ages. The break with this established way of understanding the world marks the beginning of what this handbook calls the new science or modern science
Also, in the modern period of science, Francis Bacon was a. seminal figure at the time of the Scientific Revolution. In his work Novum Organum (1620) – a reference to Aristotle's Organon – Bacon outlined a new system of logic to improve upon the old philosophical process of syllogism. Bacon's method relied on experimental histories to eliminate alternative theories.[27] Then, in 1637, René Descartes established a new framework for scientific method's guiding principles in his treatise, Discourse on Method, advocating rationalism. The writings of Alhazen, Bacon and Descartes are considered critical in the historical development of the modern scientific method, as are those of John Stuart Mill. [28] David Hume expressed skepticism about the ability of science to determine causality and gave a definitive formulation of the problem of induction.
Logical positivism Instrumentalism became popular among physicists around. the turn of the 20th century, after which logical positivismdefined the field for several decades. Logical positivism accepts only testable statements as meaningful, rejects metaphysical interpretations, and embraces verificationism. (a set of theories of knowledge that combines logicism, empiricism, and linguistics to ground philosophy on a basis consistent with examples from the empirical sciences). Seeking to overhaul all of philosophy and convert it to a new scientific philosophy,[29] the Berlin Circle and the Vienna Circle propounded logical positivism in the late 1920s. Carl Gustav
Hempel Interpreting Ludwig Wittgenstein's philosophy of language, logical positivists identified a verifiability principle or criterion of cognitive meaningfulness. From Bertrand Russell's logicism they sought reduction of mathematics to logic. They also embraced Russell's logical atomism, Ernst Mach's phenomenalism—whereby the mind knows only actual or potential sensory experience, which is the content of all sciences, whether physics or psychology—and Percy Bridgman's operationalism. Thereby, only the verifiable was scientific and cognitively meaningful, whereas theunverifiable was unscientific, cognitively meaningless "pseudostatements"—metaphysical, emotive, or such—not worthy of further review by philosophers, who were newly tasked to organize knowledge rather than develop new knowledge.
Logical positivism became famed for vigorous scientificantirealism to purge science of talk about unobservable things—including causality, mechanism, and principles— although that goal has been exaggerated[who said this?]. Still, talk of such unobservables could be allowed as metaphorical—direct observations viewed in the abstract— or at worst metaphysical or emotional. Theoretical laws would be reduced to empirical laws, while theoretical terms would garner meaning from observational terms via correspondence rules. Mathematics in physics would reduce to symbolic logic via logicism, while rational reconstruction would convert ordinary language into standardized equivalents, all networked and united by a logical syntax. A scientific theory would be stated with its method of verification, whereby a logical calculus or empirical operation could verify its falsity or truth.
SOME IMPORTANT SCIENCETISTSIN THE MODERN PHASE OF SCIENCE
The science of the mordern time cannot be complete untill the method and discoveries of the scientists that characterized the epoch are elucidated. Hence, some prominent scientists that characterise this period are:
BACON'S HISTORY AND BACONIAN SCIENCE
Francis Bacon, who was born on 22 January 1561 and died on 9 April 1626, was an English philosopher,statesman, scientist, jurist, orator, essayist, and author. He served both as Attorney General and Lord Chancellor of England. After his death, he remained extremely influential through his works, especially as philosophical advocate and practitioner of the scientific method during the scientific revolution. Bacon has been called the father of empiricism.[4]
In 1620, around the time that people first began to look through microscopes, an English politician named Sir Francis Bacon developed a method for philosophers to use in weighing the truthfulness of knowledge. While Bacon agreed with medieval thinkers that humans too often erred in interpreting what their five senses perceived, he also realized that people's sensory experiences provided the best possible means of making sense of the world. Because humans could incorrectly interpret anything they saw, heard, smelled, tasted, or felt, Bacon insisted that they must doubt everything before assuming its truth.
Testing hypotheses
In order to test potential truths, or hypotheses, Bacon devised a method whereby scientists set up experiments to manipulate nature, and attempt to prove their hypotheses wrong. For example, in order to test the idea that sickness came from external causes, Bacon argued that scientists should expose healthy people to outside influences such as coldness, wetness, or other sick people to discover if any of these external variables resulted in more people getting sick. Knowing that many different causes for sickness might be missed by humans who are unable or unwilling to perceive them, Bacon insisted that experiments must be consistently repeated before truth can be known: a scientist must show that patients exposed to a specific variable more frequently got sick again, and again, and again.
Although modern scientists have revised many of the truths subsequently adopted by Bacon and his contemporaries, we still utilize the method of proving knowledge to be true via doubt and experimentation that Bacon laid out in 1620. Bacon's philosophical work marks a very significant breakthrough for the study of the world around us, but it is important to stress that this method of investigation was not completed in a vacuum. Rather, Bacon's work should be seen as a part of a widespread cultural revolution accelerated by the rise of the printing press in the fifteenth century.
Renaissance reformation of modern science
The Renaissance was a cultural movement that profoundly affected European intellectual life in the early modern period. Beginning in Italy, and spreading to the rest of Europe by the 16th century, its influence was felt in literature, philosophy, art, music, politics, science, religion, and other aspects of intellectual inquiry. Renaissance scholars employed the humanist method in study, and searched for realism and human emotion in art.[17] Renaissance humanists such as Poggio Bracciolini sought out in Europe's monastic libraries the Latin literary, historical, and oratorical texts of Antiquity, while the Fall of Constantinople (1453) generated a wave of émigré Greek scholars bringing precious manuscripts in ancient Greek, many of which had fallen into obscurity in the West. It is in their new focus on literary and historical texts that Renaissance scholars differed so markedly from the medieval scholars of the Renaissance of the 12th century, who had focused on studying Greek and Arabic works of natural sciences, philosophy and mathematics, rather than on such cultural texts.
In the revival of neo-Platonism Renaissance humanists did not reject Christianity; quite the contrary, many of the Renaissance's greatest works were devoted to it, and the
Church patronized many works of Renaissance art. However, a subtle shift took place in the way that intellectuals approached religion that was reflected in many other areas of cultural life.[18] In addition, many Greek Christian works, including the Greek New Testament, were brought back from. Byzantium to Western Europe and engaged Western
scholars for the first time since late antiquity. This new engagement with Greek Christian works, and particularly the return to the original Greek of the New Testament promoted
by humanists Lorenzo Valla and Erasmus, would help pave the way for the Protestant Reformation.
ALBERT EINSTEIN
Einstein's early work on the theory of relativity (1905) dealt only with systems or observers in uniform (unaccelerated) motion with respect to one another and is referred to as the special theory of relativity; among other results, it demonstrated that two observers moving at great speed with respect to each other will disagree about measurements of length and time intervals made in each other's systems, that the speed of light is the limiting speed of all bodies having mass, and that mass and energy are equivalent. In 1911 he asserted the equivalence of gravitation and inertia, and in 1916 he completed his mathematical formulation of a general theory of relativity that included gravitation as a determiner of the curvature of a space-time continuum. He then began work on his unified field theory, which attempts to explain gravitation, electromagnetism, and subatomic phenomena in one set of laws; the successful development of such a unified theory, however, eluded Einstein.
Photons and the Quantum Theory
In addition to the theory of relativity, Einstein is also known for his contributions to the development of the quantum theory. He postulated (1905) light quanta (photons), upon which he based his explanation of the photoelectric effect, and he developed the quantum theory of specific heat. Although he was one of the leading figures in the development of quantum theory, Einstein regarded it as only a temporarily useful structure. He reserved his main efforts for his unified field theory, feeling that when it was completed the quantization of energy and charge would be found to be a consequence of it. Einstein wished his theories to have that simplicity and beauty which he thought fitting for an interpretation of the universe and which he did not find in quantum theory.
ISAAC NEWTON SCIENCE
Newton opened with definitions and the three laws of motion now known as Newton's laws (laws of inertia, action and reaction, and acceleration proportional to force). Book II presented Newton's new scientific philosophy which came to replace Cartesianism. Finally, Book III consisted of applications of his dynamics, including an explanation for tides and a theory of lunar motion. To test his hypothesis of universal gravitation, Newton wrote Flamsteed to ask if Saturn had been observed to slow down upon passing Jupiter. The surprised Flamsteed replied that an effect had indeed been observed, and it was closely predicted by the calculations Newton had provided. Newton's equations were further confirmed by observing the shape of the Earth to be oblate spheroidal, as Newton claimed it should be, rather than prolate spheroidal, as claimed by the Cartesians. Newton's equations also described the motion of Moon by successive approximations, and correctly predicted the return of Halley's Comet. Newton also correctly formulated and solved the first ever problem in the calculus of variations which involved finding the surface of revolution which would give minimum resistance to flow (assuming a specific drag law).
Newton invented a scientific method which was truly universal in its scope. Newton presented his methodology as a set of four rules for scientific reasoning. These rules were stated in the Principia and proposed that (1) we are to admit no more causes of natural things such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances, (2) the same natural effects must be assigned to the same causes, (3) qualities of bodies are to be esteemed as universal, and (4) propositions deduced from observation of phenomena should be viewed as accurate until other phenomena contradict them.
Galilio science
Italian scientist and philosopher. Galileo was a true Renaissance man, excelling at many different endeavors.Galileo described his views on dynamics and statics in Dialog on the Two New Sciences, which emphasized mathematics over rhetorical arguments. Galileo was one of the earliest to propose abstract dynamical theories which were ideal and would not be observed under less than ideal circumstances. Galileo observed the supernova of 1604 and tried unsuccessfully to measure its parallax. According to Copernicus's theory, the Earth's motion must produce a parallax, but no such parallax was found until Bessel. Galileo grew interested in the heavens, and built his own a telescope in 1609 after the discovery of lenses was reported from Holland. Galileo used his 30 power telescope to discover craters on the Moon, sunspots which rotated with the Sun, the four largest satellites of Jupiter, and phases of Venus. This last observation demonstrated that the Copernican theory was correct, since phases would only be observed if Venus were always closer to the sun than to the Earth. Galileo published his observations in Siderius Nuncius (The Starry Messenger) (1611). For some famous quotes and diagrams from Siderius Nuncius, see MacRobert (1990). A complete translation is contained in van Helden (1989).
Galileo also proposed Galilean relativity, which states that the same definitions of motion are valid everywhere. The resultant Galilean transformation is correct for low speeds, but must be replaced by the Lorentz transformation for relativistic speeds. Galileo also said that motion is continuous and can only be altered by the application of a force. Galileo enunciated the law of fall (which states that distance traveled is proportional to the square of time) and the time law (which states that velocity is proportional to time). There is an apocryphal story that Galileo dropped two balls of different masses simultaneously from the leaning tower of Pisa to demonstrate that bodies fall at the same rate.
THE RELIVANCE OF SCIENCE
Development is required in every individual to every nation in all aspects and for development to happen, science and technology go hand in hand. Basically science is known as the study of knowledge, which is made into a system and depends on analysing and understanding facts. Technology is basically the application of this scientific knowledge.
For any successful economy, particularly in today’s quest for knowledge based economies, science, technology and engineering are the basic requisites. If nations do not implement science and technology, then the chances of getting themselves developed becomes minimal and thus could be even rated as an undeveloped nation. Science and Technology is associated in all means with modernity and it is an essential tool for rapid development.
Modernization in every aspect of life is the greatest example of the implementation of science and technology in every nation. With the introduction of modern gadgets in every walk of life, life has become simple and this is possible only because of implementing science and technology together. Without having modern equipment’s in all sectors, be it in medicines, infrastructure, aviation, electricity, information technology or any other field, the advancement and benefits that we face today would not have been possible. A nation who is not able to prosper on these grounds would never be able to sustain the lives there and may have to solely depend on other nations for the basic requirements. Such is the influence of science and technology for the development of a nation.
The role that science and technology has played in improving the life conditions across the globe is vivid, but the benefit has to been harvested maximum by all countries. Science and technology has made life a lot easier and also a lot better with the advancement of medicines and analysis on diseases. Apart from the medical side, there has been remarkable development in education, communication, agriculture, industry etc. the global economic output has increased 17 folds in the 20th century. In spite of the advancements in almost all sectors, still the world is not free from hunger, disease, pollution, illiteracy and poverty. The gap between the rich and the poor has widened. By the 21st century, with the right applications of research, development, and implications of science and technology a major difference could be brought about.
EVALUATIVE CONCLUSION
The scientific revolution was extremely broad in scope, and its ramifications are difficult to fully and coherently express. Mostly though, it gave birth to rational thought, that is, the idea that everything in the natural world has a reasonable explanation, and that there are rules that govern the world. This idea has been applied to economics (laissez faire economics, in other words, ideal capitalism where the market, being supply and demand determines the value of good), politics(liberalism, which is the idea that all men are born equal and that they are only subject to the laws of nature, like gravity or any other law.), and pretty much every other human endeavor. Without this revolution our world simply would not exist as we know it.
BILBLOGRAPHY
Martyn Shuttleworth (Sep 4, 2009). Philosophy of Science History. Retrieved Jan 23, 2015 from Explorable.com: https://explorable.com/history-of- the-philosophy-of-science
www.citizenthought.net/Modern_Western_Philosophy.htmlpoiuy
Derson, F. H., 1948, The Philosophy of Francis Bacon, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bierman, J., 1963, “Science and Society in the New Atlantis and other Renaissance Utopias”, PMLA, 78(5): 492–500.
Blumenberg, H., 1973, Der Prozess der theoretischen Neugierde, Frankfurt am Main.
Bowen, C. D., 1963 [1993], Francis Bacon. The Temper of a Man,
New York: Fordham University Press. First edition 1963, Boston: Little, Brown.
Brandt, R., 1979, “Francis Bacon, Die Idolenlehre”, in Grundprobleme der großen Philosophen. Philosophie der Neuzeit I , edited by Josef Speck. Göttingen, pp. 9–34.
Burtt, E. A., 1924 [1932], The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science, London. First Edition, April 1924; Second Edition (revised) January 1932; reprinted 1972
Empiricism: The influence of Francis Bacon, John Locke, and David Hume" . Sweet Briar College. Archived from the original on 2013-07-08. Retrieved 21 October 2013.
Bacon, Francis (BCN573F)" . A Cambridge Alumni Database. University of Cambridge.
Bacon, Francis (1 June 2003). History of Life and Death . ISBN 978-0-7661-6272-3.
Stanford, P. Kyle (2006). Exceeding Our Grasp: Science, History, and the Problem of Unconceived Alternatives. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-517408-3.
Laudan, Larry (1981). "A Confutation of Convergent Realism". Philosophy of Science 48: 218–249. doi:10.1086/288975 .
Van Fraassen, Bas (1980). The Scientific Image. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. ISBN 0-19-824424-X.
Winsberg, Eric (September 2006). "Models of Success Versus the Success of Models: Reliability without Truth". Synthese 152: 1–19. doi:10.1007/s11229-004-5404-6
Christianson, G. E. In the Presence of Creation: Isaac Newton and His Times. New York: Free Press, 1984.
BY: EKENEME VINCENT CHIBUKE
INTRODUCTION
The mismatch between common representations of “science” and the miscellany of ma- terials typically studied by the historian of science is traced to a systematic ambiguity that may itself be traced to early modern Europe. In that cultural setting, natural philosophy came to be rearticulated (most famously by Francis Bacon) as involving both contemplative and practical knowledge. The resulting tension and ambiguity are illustrated by the eighteenth-century views of Buffon. In the nineteenth century, a new enterprise called “science” represents the establishment of an unstable ideology of natural knowledge that was heavily indebted to those early modern developments. The two complementary and competing elements of the ideology of modern science are accordingly described as “natural philosophy” (a discourse of contemplative knowledge) and “instrumentality” (a discourse of practical or useful knowledge; know-how). The history of science in large part concerns the story of their shifting, often mutually denying, interrelations.
Science is a body of empirical, theoretical, and practical knowledge about the natural world, produced by scientists who emphasize the observation, explanation, and prediction of real world phenomena. Historiography of science, in contrast, often draws on the historical method sof both intellectual history and social history.The English word scientist is relatively recent—first coined by William Whewell in the 19th century. Previously, people investigating nature called themselves natural philosophers.While empirical investigations of the natural world have been described since classical antiquity (for example, by Thales, Aristotle, and others), and scientific methods have been employed since the Middle Ages (for example, by Ibnal-Haytham, and Roger Bacon), the dawn of modern scienceis often traced back to the early modern period and in particular to the scientific revolution that took place in 16th- and 17th-century Europe.
Furthermore, the historical tren or modern. Science can said to av started aroune 17th century to 20th century. This period was however characterised by different scientists, such as Francis Bacon, Albert Einstein Coprenicles Galileo, Newton and others. Also, scientific methods are considered to be so fundamental to modern science that some consider earlier inquiries into nature to be pre-scientific.[1] Traditionally, historians of science have defined science sufficiently broadly to include those inquiries.[2] From the 18th century through late 20th century, the history of science, especially of the physical and biological sciences, was often presented in a progressive narrative in which true theories replaced false beliefs.
For the purpose of the work however a closer outlook sha be taken on the historical tragetory of morden science that took place within 18th century and 20th century respectively. To dazzle into the discussion, it will be fitting to take into consideration this outline which will guide the expose:
The history and nature of science
The history and rise of modern Science
The history of Francis Bacon and his science
Renaissance reformation of modern science
Galileo science
Albert Einstein and his science
The relevance of science
Evaluation
Conclusion
NATURE AND HISTORY OF SCIENCE
Science is a body of empirical and theoretical knowledge, produced by a global community of researchers, making use of specific techniques for the observation and explanation of real phenomena, this techne as a whole being summed up under the heading of scientific method. As such, the history of science draws on the historical methods of both intellectual history and social history.The Scientific Revolution of the sixteenth and early seventeenth century saw the inception of modern scientific methods to guide the evaluation of knowledge. This change is considered to be so fundamental that some especially philosophers of science and practicing scientists consider such earlier inquiries into nature to be pre-scientific. Traditionally, historians of science have defined science sufficiently broadly to include those inquiry.
The scientific revolution was built upon the foundation of ancient Greek learning and science in the Middle Ages, as it had been elaborated and further developed by Roman/ Byzantine science and medieval Islamic science.[5] Some scholars have noted a direct tie between "particular aspects of traditional Christianity" and the rise of science.[16][17] The "Aristotelian tradition" was still an important intellectual framework in by the 17th century, although by that time natural philosophers had moved away from much of it.[4] Key scientific ideas dating back to classical antiquity had changed drastically over the years, and in many cases been discredited.[4] The ideas that remained, which were. transformed fundamentally during the scientific revolution, include:
Aristotle's cosmology that placed the Earth at the center of a spherical hierarchic cosmos. The terrestrial and celestial regions were made up of different elements which had different kinds of natural movement.
The terrestrial region, according to Aristotle, consisted of concentric spheres of the four elements—earth, water, air, and fire. All bodies naturally moved in straight lines until they reached the sphere appropriate to their elemental composition—their natural place. All other. terrestrial motions were non-natural, or violent.[18][19]
The celestial region was made up of the fifth element, aether, which was unchanging and moved naturally with uniform circular motion.[20] In the Aristotelian tradition, astronomical theories sought to explain the observed irregular motion of celestial objects through the combined effects of multiple uniform circular motions.[21]
Down to the 18th century, the history of the philosophy of science began to see the first real development in a specific scientific method that would distinguish it from non-sciences. It is difficult, even now, to give a definition of science, and it is perhaps more fruitful to define what it is not, a process started by the philosopher Christian Huygens (1629 - 1695). He argued that science and mathematics were actually different fields, and could not be treated the same way. The distinction he made between the two was the idea of proof. He stated that mathematics and geometry could prove something beyond doubt, whereas science can never prove something emphatically; merely give a probability that a certain finding is true.
Huygens was the first proponent of the hypothetico- deductive method, where a scientist proposes a hypothesis and then tries to deduce the probability that it is correct, through observational and empirical observation. This built upon the work of Bacon, but also developed the idea that scientists could approach the truth by constantly refining experiments and increasing the probability of their hypothesis being correct. This period saw the first divergence of the history of the philosophy of science from metaphysical philosophy.
At this time, Newton also entered the fray, initially possessing a divergent view from Huygens, possibly because of his differing viewpoint as a mathematician. He did not advocate hypotheses, believing that any research using a hypothesis could not be scientific. Newton argued that any scientific undertaking should begin with analysis, where a scholar performed observations and experiments and then made conclusions depending upon he results. His viewpoint was christened synthesis, where these inductive conclusions should be applied to the universe as a whole, to build up a model of the universe. Newton was also an example of a scientist/philosopher who believed that the almighty was behind every process in theuniverse, and that it was too complex to be explained by physics alone.
THE HISTORY AND RISE OF MODERN SCIENCE
The scientific revolution was the emergence of modern science during the early modern period, when developments in mathematics, physics, astronomy, biology (including human anatomy) and chemistry transformed views of society and nature. [1][2][3][4][5][6] The scientific revolution began in Europe towards the end of the Renaissance period and continued through the late 18th century, influencing the intellectual social movement known as the Enlightenment. While its dates are disputed, the publication in 1543 of Nicolaus Copernicus's De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres) is often cited as marking the beginning of
the scientific revolution, and its completion is attributed to the "grand synthesis" of Newton's 1687 Principia. By the end of the 18th century, the scientific revolution had given way to the " Age of Reflection".
The concept of a scientific revolution taking place over an extended period emerged in the eighteenth century in the work of Bailly, who saw a two-stage process of sweeping
away the old and establishing the new.At the start of the 18th century, natural philosophy had not yet separated itself entirely from alchemy, folk tales, or magic, and there was no clear separation between science and religion, as the career of Newton confirms (1). Nor
was there any clear demarcation between philosophy and science. Whether the new direction in natural philosophy should base itself, following Descartes, on the Continental tradition of rationalism (deductive systems) with mathematics at the center of the inquiry or, following Bacon, on empiricism (experiment and observation) or on some appropriate combination of the two was a constant and disputatious concern. Thus, there was no consensus on how the scores of scientific theories should be evaluated, no prevailing "correct" scientific procedure.
However, those promoting new ways of thinking in science, for all their differences, had one important similarity: they were reacting against a long tradition in natural philosophy, seeking to discover a different way of understanding the. natural world. This old tradition originated with the Ancient Greeks and had been appropriated with important modifications by Christian thinkers in the Middle Ages. The break with this established way of understanding the world marks the beginning of what this handbook calls the new science or modern science
Also, in the modern period of science, Francis Bacon was a. seminal figure at the time of the Scientific Revolution. In his work Novum Organum (1620) – a reference to Aristotle's Organon – Bacon outlined a new system of logic to improve upon the old philosophical process of syllogism. Bacon's method relied on experimental histories to eliminate alternative theories.[27] Then, in 1637, René Descartes established a new framework for scientific method's guiding principles in his treatise, Discourse on Method, advocating rationalism. The writings of Alhazen, Bacon and Descartes are considered critical in the historical development of the modern scientific method, as are those of John Stuart Mill. [28] David Hume expressed skepticism about the ability of science to determine causality and gave a definitive formulation of the problem of induction.
Logical positivism Instrumentalism became popular among physicists around. the turn of the 20th century, after which logical positivismdefined the field for several decades. Logical positivism accepts only testable statements as meaningful, rejects metaphysical interpretations, and embraces verificationism. (a set of theories of knowledge that combines logicism, empiricism, and linguistics to ground philosophy on a basis consistent with examples from the empirical sciences). Seeking to overhaul all of philosophy and convert it to a new scientific philosophy,[29] the Berlin Circle and the Vienna Circle propounded logical positivism in the late 1920s. Carl Gustav
Hempel Interpreting Ludwig Wittgenstein's philosophy of language, logical positivists identified a verifiability principle or criterion of cognitive meaningfulness. From Bertrand Russell's logicism they sought reduction of mathematics to logic. They also embraced Russell's logical atomism, Ernst Mach's phenomenalism—whereby the mind knows only actual or potential sensory experience, which is the content of all sciences, whether physics or psychology—and Percy Bridgman's operationalism. Thereby, only the verifiable was scientific and cognitively meaningful, whereas theunverifiable was unscientific, cognitively meaningless "pseudostatements"—metaphysical, emotive, or such—not worthy of further review by philosophers, who were newly tasked to organize knowledge rather than develop new knowledge.
Logical positivism became famed for vigorous scientificantirealism to purge science of talk about unobservable things—including causality, mechanism, and principles— although that goal has been exaggerated[who said this?]. Still, talk of such unobservables could be allowed as metaphorical—direct observations viewed in the abstract— or at worst metaphysical or emotional. Theoretical laws would be reduced to empirical laws, while theoretical terms would garner meaning from observational terms via correspondence rules. Mathematics in physics would reduce to symbolic logic via logicism, while rational reconstruction would convert ordinary language into standardized equivalents, all networked and united by a logical syntax. A scientific theory would be stated with its method of verification, whereby a logical calculus or empirical operation could verify its falsity or truth.
SOME IMPORTANT SCIENCETISTSIN THE MODERN PHASE OF SCIENCE
The science of the mordern time cannot be complete untill the method and discoveries of the scientists that characterized the epoch are elucidated. Hence, some prominent scientists that characterise this period are:
BACON'S HISTORY AND BACONIAN SCIENCE
Francis Bacon, who was born on 22 January 1561 and died on 9 April 1626, was an English philosopher,statesman, scientist, jurist, orator, essayist, and author. He served both as Attorney General and Lord Chancellor of England. After his death, he remained extremely influential through his works, especially as philosophical advocate and practitioner of the scientific method during the scientific revolution. Bacon has been called the father of empiricism.[4]
In 1620, around the time that people first began to look through microscopes, an English politician named Sir Francis Bacon developed a method for philosophers to use in weighing the truthfulness of knowledge. While Bacon agreed with medieval thinkers that humans too often erred in interpreting what their five senses perceived, he also realized that people's sensory experiences provided the best possible means of making sense of the world. Because humans could incorrectly interpret anything they saw, heard, smelled, tasted, or felt, Bacon insisted that they must doubt everything before assuming its truth.
Testing hypotheses
In order to test potential truths, or hypotheses, Bacon devised a method whereby scientists set up experiments to manipulate nature, and attempt to prove their hypotheses wrong. For example, in order to test the idea that sickness came from external causes, Bacon argued that scientists should expose healthy people to outside influences such as coldness, wetness, or other sick people to discover if any of these external variables resulted in more people getting sick. Knowing that many different causes for sickness might be missed by humans who are unable or unwilling to perceive them, Bacon insisted that experiments must be consistently repeated before truth can be known: a scientist must show that patients exposed to a specific variable more frequently got sick again, and again, and again.
Although modern scientists have revised many of the truths subsequently adopted by Bacon and his contemporaries, we still utilize the method of proving knowledge to be true via doubt and experimentation that Bacon laid out in 1620. Bacon's philosophical work marks a very significant breakthrough for the study of the world around us, but it is important to stress that this method of investigation was not completed in a vacuum. Rather, Bacon's work should be seen as a part of a widespread cultural revolution accelerated by the rise of the printing press in the fifteenth century.
Renaissance reformation of modern science
The Renaissance was a cultural movement that profoundly affected European intellectual life in the early modern period. Beginning in Italy, and spreading to the rest of Europe by the 16th century, its influence was felt in literature, philosophy, art, music, politics, science, religion, and other aspects of intellectual inquiry. Renaissance scholars employed the humanist method in study, and searched for realism and human emotion in art.[17] Renaissance humanists such as Poggio Bracciolini sought out in Europe's monastic libraries the Latin literary, historical, and oratorical texts of Antiquity, while the Fall of Constantinople (1453) generated a wave of émigré Greek scholars bringing precious manuscripts in ancient Greek, many of which had fallen into obscurity in the West. It is in their new focus on literary and historical texts that Renaissance scholars differed so markedly from the medieval scholars of the Renaissance of the 12th century, who had focused on studying Greek and Arabic works of natural sciences, philosophy and mathematics, rather than on such cultural texts.
In the revival of neo-Platonism Renaissance humanists did not reject Christianity; quite the contrary, many of the Renaissance's greatest works were devoted to it, and the
Church patronized many works of Renaissance art. However, a subtle shift took place in the way that intellectuals approached religion that was reflected in many other areas of cultural life.[18] In addition, many Greek Christian works, including the Greek New Testament, were brought back from. Byzantium to Western Europe and engaged Western
scholars for the first time since late antiquity. This new engagement with Greek Christian works, and particularly the return to the original Greek of the New Testament promoted
by humanists Lorenzo Valla and Erasmus, would help pave the way for the Protestant Reformation.
ALBERT EINSTEIN
Einstein's early work on the theory of relativity (1905) dealt only with systems or observers in uniform (unaccelerated) motion with respect to one another and is referred to as the special theory of relativity; among other results, it demonstrated that two observers moving at great speed with respect to each other will disagree about measurements of length and time intervals made in each other's systems, that the speed of light is the limiting speed of all bodies having mass, and that mass and energy are equivalent. In 1911 he asserted the equivalence of gravitation and inertia, and in 1916 he completed his mathematical formulation of a general theory of relativity that included gravitation as a determiner of the curvature of a space-time continuum. He then began work on his unified field theory, which attempts to explain gravitation, electromagnetism, and subatomic phenomena in one set of laws; the successful development of such a unified theory, however, eluded Einstein.
Photons and the Quantum Theory
In addition to the theory of relativity, Einstein is also known for his contributions to the development of the quantum theory. He postulated (1905) light quanta (photons), upon which he based his explanation of the photoelectric effect, and he developed the quantum theory of specific heat. Although he was one of the leading figures in the development of quantum theory, Einstein regarded it as only a temporarily useful structure. He reserved his main efforts for his unified field theory, feeling that when it was completed the quantization of energy and charge would be found to be a consequence of it. Einstein wished his theories to have that simplicity and beauty which he thought fitting for an interpretation of the universe and which he did not find in quantum theory.
ISAAC NEWTON SCIENCE
Newton opened with definitions and the three laws of motion now known as Newton's laws (laws of inertia, action and reaction, and acceleration proportional to force). Book II presented Newton's new scientific philosophy which came to replace Cartesianism. Finally, Book III consisted of applications of his dynamics, including an explanation for tides and a theory of lunar motion. To test his hypothesis of universal gravitation, Newton wrote Flamsteed to ask if Saturn had been observed to slow down upon passing Jupiter. The surprised Flamsteed replied that an effect had indeed been observed, and it was closely predicted by the calculations Newton had provided. Newton's equations were further confirmed by observing the shape of the Earth to be oblate spheroidal, as Newton claimed it should be, rather than prolate spheroidal, as claimed by the Cartesians. Newton's equations also described the motion of Moon by successive approximations, and correctly predicted the return of Halley's Comet. Newton also correctly formulated and solved the first ever problem in the calculus of variations which involved finding the surface of revolution which would give minimum resistance to flow (assuming a specific drag law).
Newton invented a scientific method which was truly universal in its scope. Newton presented his methodology as a set of four rules for scientific reasoning. These rules were stated in the Principia and proposed that (1) we are to admit no more causes of natural things such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances, (2) the same natural effects must be assigned to the same causes, (3) qualities of bodies are to be esteemed as universal, and (4) propositions deduced from observation of phenomena should be viewed as accurate until other phenomena contradict them.
Galilio science
Italian scientist and philosopher. Galileo was a true Renaissance man, excelling at many different endeavors.Galileo described his views on dynamics and statics in Dialog on the Two New Sciences, which emphasized mathematics over rhetorical arguments. Galileo was one of the earliest to propose abstract dynamical theories which were ideal and would not be observed under less than ideal circumstances. Galileo observed the supernova of 1604 and tried unsuccessfully to measure its parallax. According to Copernicus's theory, the Earth's motion must produce a parallax, but no such parallax was found until Bessel. Galileo grew interested in the heavens, and built his own a telescope in 1609 after the discovery of lenses was reported from Holland. Galileo used his 30 power telescope to discover craters on the Moon, sunspots which rotated with the Sun, the four largest satellites of Jupiter, and phases of Venus. This last observation demonstrated that the Copernican theory was correct, since phases would only be observed if Venus were always closer to the sun than to the Earth. Galileo published his observations in Siderius Nuncius (The Starry Messenger) (1611). For some famous quotes and diagrams from Siderius Nuncius, see MacRobert (1990). A complete translation is contained in van Helden (1989).
Galileo also proposed Galilean relativity, which states that the same definitions of motion are valid everywhere. The resultant Galilean transformation is correct for low speeds, but must be replaced by the Lorentz transformation for relativistic speeds. Galileo also said that motion is continuous and can only be altered by the application of a force. Galileo enunciated the law of fall (which states that distance traveled is proportional to the square of time) and the time law (which states that velocity is proportional to time). There is an apocryphal story that Galileo dropped two balls of different masses simultaneously from the leaning tower of Pisa to demonstrate that bodies fall at the same rate.
THE RELIVANCE OF SCIENCE
Development is required in every individual to every nation in all aspects and for development to happen, science and technology go hand in hand. Basically science is known as the study of knowledge, which is made into a system and depends on analysing and understanding facts. Technology is basically the application of this scientific knowledge.
For any successful economy, particularly in today’s quest for knowledge based economies, science, technology and engineering are the basic requisites. If nations do not implement science and technology, then the chances of getting themselves developed becomes minimal and thus could be even rated as an undeveloped nation. Science and Technology is associated in all means with modernity and it is an essential tool for rapid development.
Modernization in every aspect of life is the greatest example of the implementation of science and technology in every nation. With the introduction of modern gadgets in every walk of life, life has become simple and this is possible only because of implementing science and technology together. Without having modern equipment’s in all sectors, be it in medicines, infrastructure, aviation, electricity, information technology or any other field, the advancement and benefits that we face today would not have been possible. A nation who is not able to prosper on these grounds would never be able to sustain the lives there and may have to solely depend on other nations for the basic requirements. Such is the influence of science and technology for the development of a nation.
The role that science and technology has played in improving the life conditions across the globe is vivid, but the benefit has to been harvested maximum by all countries. Science and technology has made life a lot easier and also a lot better with the advancement of medicines and analysis on diseases. Apart from the medical side, there has been remarkable development in education, communication, agriculture, industry etc. the global economic output has increased 17 folds in the 20th century. In spite of the advancements in almost all sectors, still the world is not free from hunger, disease, pollution, illiteracy and poverty. The gap between the rich and the poor has widened. By the 21st century, with the right applications of research, development, and implications of science and technology a major difference could be brought about.
EVALUATIVE CONCLUSION
The scientific revolution was extremely broad in scope, and its ramifications are difficult to fully and coherently express. Mostly though, it gave birth to rational thought, that is, the idea that everything in the natural world has a reasonable explanation, and that there are rules that govern the world. This idea has been applied to economics (laissez faire economics, in other words, ideal capitalism where the market, being supply and demand determines the value of good), politics(liberalism, which is the idea that all men are born equal and that they are only subject to the laws of nature, like gravity or any other law.), and pretty much every other human endeavor. Without this revolution our world simply would not exist as we know it.
BILBLOGRAPHY
Martyn Shuttleworth (Sep 4, 2009). Philosophy of Science History. Retrieved Jan 23, 2015 from Explorable.com: https://explorable.com/history-of- the-philosophy-of-science
www.citizenthought.net/Modern_Western_Philosophy.htmlpoiuy
Derson, F. H., 1948, The Philosophy of Francis Bacon, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bierman, J., 1963, “Science and Society in the New Atlantis and other Renaissance Utopias”, PMLA, 78(5): 492–500.
Blumenberg, H., 1973, Der Prozess der theoretischen Neugierde, Frankfurt am Main.
Bowen, C. D., 1963 [1993], Francis Bacon. The Temper of a Man,
New York: Fordham University Press. First edition 1963, Boston: Little, Brown.
Brandt, R., 1979, “Francis Bacon, Die Idolenlehre”, in Grundprobleme der großen Philosophen. Philosophie der Neuzeit I , edited by Josef Speck. Göttingen, pp. 9–34.
Burtt, E. A., 1924 [1932], The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science, London. First Edition, April 1924; Second Edition (revised) January 1932; reprinted 1972
Empiricism: The influence of Francis Bacon, John Locke, and David Hume" . Sweet Briar College. Archived from the original on 2013-07-08. Retrieved 21 October 2013.
Bacon, Francis (BCN573F)" . A Cambridge Alumni Database. University of Cambridge.
Bacon, Francis (1 June 2003). History of Life and Death . ISBN 978-0-7661-6272-3.
Stanford, P. Kyle (2006). Exceeding Our Grasp: Science, History, and the Problem of Unconceived Alternatives. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-517408-3.
Laudan, Larry (1981). "A Confutation of Convergent Realism". Philosophy of Science 48: 218–249. doi:10.1086/288975 .
Van Fraassen, Bas (1980). The Scientific Image. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. ISBN 0-19-824424-X.
Winsberg, Eric (September 2006). "Models of Success Versus the Success of Models: Reliability without Truth". Synthese 152: 1–19. doi:10.1007/s11229-004-5404-6
Christianson, G. E. In the Presence of Creation: Isaac Newton and His Times. New York: Free Press, 1984.
LONELINESS: A SOURCE OF BEAUTY
But the more I think about loneliness, the more I think that the wound of loneliness is like the Grand Canyon – a deep incision in the surface of our existence which has become an inexhaustible source of beauty and self understanding. The Christian way of life does not take away our loneliness; it protects and cherishes it as a precious gift. Sometimes it seems we do everything possible to avoid painful confrontation with our basic human loneliness, and allow ourselves to be trapped down by false gods promising immediate satisfaction and quick relief. But perhaps the painful awareness f loneliness is an invitation to transcend our limitations and look beyond the boundaries of our existence. The awareness of loneliness may be a gift we must protect and guard, because our loneliness reveals us to inner emptiness that can be misunderstood, but filled with promise for him who can tolerate its sweet pain.
It is the most basic human loneliness that threatens us and it is so hard to face. So often we do everything to avoid the confrontation of the experience of being alone, and sometimes we are able to create the most ingenious devices to prevent ourselves from being reminded of this condition. The fact remains that we need to be alone for sometimes to really discover ourselves. The good things we are able to gather out of our loneliness will be exploded or refined in solitude when the need arises.
When we are impatient, when we want to give up our loneliness and try to overcome the separation and incompleteness we feel too soon, we easily relate to our human world with devastating expectations. We ignore what we already know with a deep-seated, intuitive knowledge – that no love or friendship, no intimate embrace, no community, commune or collective, no man or woman, will ever be able to satisfy our desire to be released from our lonely condition. This truth is so disconcerting and painful that we are more prone to play games which our fantasies than to face the truth of our existence. Thus we keep hoping that one day we will find the man who really understand our experiences, the woman who will bring peace to our restless life, and the job where we can fulfill our potential, the book which can explain everything and the place where we can feel at home. Such false hope will lead us to make exhausting demands and prepare us for bitterness and dangerous hostility when we start discovering that nobody, and nothing, can live up our absolutistic expectations.
The development of our inner sensitivity is the beginning of spiritual life… by slowly converting our loneliness into deep solitude; we create that precious space where we can discover te voice telling us about the inner necessity – that is, our vocation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)