The Age Of Classical Science
This profound transformation of science within the 16th and seventeenth centuries was the first scientific revolution, dominated by such figures as Galileo, J. Kepler, W. Harvey, R. Descartes, C. Huygens, and I. The technological advances of contemporary science, which in the public mind are sometimes identified with science itself, have affected virtually each facet of life.
The Sociology Of Mathematical Knowledge
In its extreme varieties this view regards science as hostile to man and denies that it exerts a constructive influence on culture. However, the outcomes of science—scientific knowledge—are primarily worldwide. Science as a social institution; group and management in science. Science became a social institution in the seventeenth and early 18th centuries, when the first learned societies and academies had been based in Europe and the publication of scientific journals began.
Earlier, science as an independent social institution was preserved and developed informally by traditions transmitted through books, instruction, correspondence, and personal contact between scientists. The reliance of contemporary science on experiments and the event of mechanics permitted the establishment of a link between science and production, although this hyperlink turned permanent and systematic only in the late nineteenth century. Science within the trendy sense emerged in the 16th and 17th centuries to satisfy the needs of growing capitalist manufacturing. Apart from past traditions, two circumstances contributed to the rise of science. First, the domination of spiritual thought was undermined during the Renaissance, and the opposing conception of the world that advanced rested on scientific knowledge. Science became an independent factor in intellectual life and the basis for a world view (Leonardo da Vinci, N. Copernicus). Second, along with statement, fashionable science launched experimentation, which became the essential method of analysis and significantly expanded the scope of knowable actuality by combining theoretical reasoning with a practical “testing” of nature.
There are also other methods of isolating different elements of a general hyperlink between the sciences and forming corresponding rules—for example, from empirical description to theoretical rationalization or from concept to practice. In a society of antagonistic courses, the complexities and contradictions associated with the growing significance of science give rise to various and frequently contradictory evaluations of science. Scientism and antiscientism represent the two extremes of such evaluations. Scientism converts into absolutes the mode of thought and common methods of the precise sciences and declares science to be the supreme cultural worth, incessantly rejecting humanitarian and philosophical issues on the grounds that they don’t have any cognitive significance. In distinction, antiscientism proceeds from the belief that science is essentially inadequate for fixing fundamental human problems.