Origins of the Scientific Method

Post Reply New Topic

Where and When?
Aristotle? Hippocrates? The Indians, the Persians, the Europeans?

that depends on how strict you define your scientific method.

this is not to mean a complete change of meaning but if we say that the scientific method is the systematic observation and correlation of the world with the express purpose of learning about it,
then it suddenly becomes impossible to answer, you would have specific areas where different cultures applied something that we could call a rough scientific method, many of them older than any of the options above.

The pre-Socratic Ionian philosophers. They got rid of gods and their whims and substituted some sort of principle that could be known by humans and applied logically. They also sought the basics substance or substances from which all things are made.

Here is a starting set you can begin your studies with:

Heraclitus
475 BCE) was a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher , a native of the ... imaginative duo of weeping and laughing philosophers: "Among the wise, ...
44 KB (6,091 words) - 20:30, 17 August 2012
Thales
546 BC) was a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher from Miletus in Asia ... Almost all of the other pre-Socratic philosophers follow him in ...
40 KB (5,865 words) - 18:04, 13 August 2012
Democritus
Greek ... Thrace , Greece He ... influential pre-Socratic ... as more of a scientist than other Greek philosophers; however their ideas rested on ...
34 KB (4,632 words) - 17:05, 3 September 2012


Zeno of Elea
430 BC) was a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher of southern Italy ... his Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers where it is reported that ...
10 KB (1,218 words) - 14:12, 5 September 2012

ruveyn

Maybe it was the first humans to control fire - they must have observed and tested their ideas about it. Or the first humans to design a cutting tool; or the first ones to work out the amount of energy required to throw a rock and hit an enemy.

Humans have been empirical from the git-go. However they identified causes as whims of the gods and manifestations of demons and spirits for starters. It was the Ionian pre-socratics that figured out that nature operates accord to laws and principles. Once this are known then we can use logic to figure out what is going on. So, science as we know it, originated with the Ionian Greeks who also invented axiomatic mathematics. That was a Greek original. No other civilization got that before the Greeks although many civilizations invented measurement and number. In fact, the word "Geometry" is Greek for surveying. The Greeks made geometry based on logic rather than on handy dandy rules of thumb like the Egyptians and Babylonians.

ruveyn

that is quite a broad and sweeping statement,

many people today still do just that, doesnt mean others do, even then religion doesnt exlude actual literal interpretation of the world, at least in a subset.

The statement about Greek originality in the invention of axiomatic mathematics is backed up by the ancient manuscripts from Babylon and Egypt. The Babylonians and Egyptians did mathematics according to heuristics and rules of thumb. Even the way they stated problems was by example rather than in general terms. The Babylonians and Egyptians were clever folk but it was the Greeks who invented the axiomatic method.

ruveyn

still only talking about a subset,

the axiomatic method while the center of our modern implementation of the scientific method doesnt preclude subsets of the scientific method from existing in multiple cultures before the greeks, this in turn would no doubt have inspired any philosophers.

that is why it, depending on how strict your defintion is, its very hard to find an actual origin, we can quickly agree there are contributors, among them were the greeks, there were some very early work on observation and engineering as a result of that in asia for an example.

Observe ... hypothesize ... test ... confirm ... theorize ... review ... apply ...

...

1. Thog see flash from sky hit tree. Tree make burning.

2. Hmm ... if Thog make sky-flash, Thog have burning.

3. OOO-gah! BOO-gah! Sky-flash! Sky-flash! BOOM! BOOM BOOM!

4. Sky flash again! More burning trees!

5. Thog think Great Ooogah-Boogah like Thog!

6. Look, Grog! You try! No sky-flash? Thog right. Sky-god only like Thog.

7. Fellow cave-dwellers! Thog represent Great sky-god Ooogah-Boogah! Give Thog food and women and Thog not have sky-god smite you!

...

Thus, the scientific method was born, followed rapidly by the first exploitative theocracy.

Science begins with banishing the Gods from nature.

ruveyn

When Thales of Miletus started a school dedicated to reasoned discussion and criticism rather then learning to regurgitate myth and dogma.

That is not science. That is crude empiricism. Science started when general rules and laws were invoked to predict or explain what happened in nature. Science reached maturity when the experimental methods and mathematical approaches were joined to general philosophical laws nature.

Humans, at every level of development have been empirical.

ruveyn

True, but empiricism is a foundation-stone of science, while rationalism is more a foundation-stone of philosophy.


... to correct and refine the crude "goddidit" empiricism into the virtually self-correcting investigative system that we have today.


I most respectfully disagree, since if every level of development were empirical, we would not have religion (imo).

(Then again, that last line reads like the argument that goes, "If evolution were true, we wouldn't have monkeys".)

Regardless, somewhere along the line, Thog's descendents realized that the Great Oogah-Boogah was just a myth, and they tried to find out what really causes lightning and how to make fire for themselves. That is another foundation-stone of science - never posit supernatural causes when natural causes are sufficient.


Fnord

The first time this ever happened historically was with the advent of Buddhism. The Buddhist faith is not a true religion as much as it is a philosophy that acknowledges that there are laws of nature which are not caused by any Divine entity. The Buddhist Cosmology views the Universe as being autonomous, and not created simply to satisfy human desires.

You are making a typical assumption that prehistory everyone was stupid. Early humans may have seen fire for what it was - a useful but destructive force that he/she managed to control. It shows confidence and understanding. There is no evidence to suggest that early humans had a hierarchy. In fact I would say it is more likely we had flat co-operative tribes for the greater part of pre-history.

Look kid, that's not science. That's RELIGION.