>> It's time to put on our thinking caps and
interpret the significance of what we've been
exploring. Unless it explains, history is
trivial. Did you find much this week that
needs to be explained? As you explored Mesopotamian
astronomy, you encountered different, sometimes
contradictory explanations. Interpretations
of Mesopotamian science have varied over time,
and continue to be disputed. How can we take
steps to ensure that our interpretations are
warranted and not merely subjective speculations?
How might we minimize our inherent human tendencies
toward presentism and rational reconstruction?
One of the fundamental issues underlying different
interpretations of Mesopotamian science is
this: Was Mesopotamian astronomy "scientific"?
Or was science invented by the Greeks? To
decide this question, we need to consider
several related issues, including: What is
nature? How is nature known? What it comes
down to is how do you define science? How
broad or restrictive in scope is your definition?
Does your definition of science include technology
and practical know-how? Does science include
empirical investigations, which produce quantitative
and testable empirical predictions, even when
they were motivated by religious impulses
or associated with mythology? Do you see how
your answers to these questions affect your
interpretation of the origin of science?
Imagine that you are conversing with a friend
about what you've been learning this week.
Your friend, who is equally knowledgeable
as you (knowing no more, and no less), says
something like this: "The duties of Mesopotamian
scribes included gathering omens from stars
and livers, exorcising demons, and healing
diseases. The scribes of ancient Mesopotamia
developed the art of reading omens in, say,
sheep entrails. This does not make them biologists!
Eventually they also devoted themselves to
reading omens in the celestial motions. This
does not make them astronomers! They were
merely practicing a celestial art; a type
of priestcraft (a type of technology or magic)
analogous to and no more scientific than reading
liver entrails. Such astrology is far removed
from scientific astronomy. The latter we owe
entirely to the Greeks."
Now, if a friend or fellow classmate said
this, how would you respond?
Why?
In contrast to our hypothetical friend, historian
of science Asger Aaboe asserts that science
exists wherever one finds empirically testable
mathematical predictions: "Mesopotamian astronomy
[he wrote] ... became the model for the new
exact sciences which learned from it their
principal goal: to give a mathematical description
of a particular class of natural phenomena
capable of yielding numerical predictions
that can be tested against observations. It
is in this sense that I claim that Babylonian
mathematical astronomy was the origin of all
subsequent serious endeavour in the exact
sciences."
So, how do different definitions of science
affect interpretations of when and where science
began?
On the one hand, our friend rules out Mesopotamian
astronomy as not meeting his definition of
science. On the other, Aaboe asserts that
Mesopotamian astronomy was the origin of subsequent
quantitative traditions in the history of
science. Who is right? Given what you've learned
about Mesopotamian astronomy, consider this
statement by Anton Pannekoek, a historian
of science. Pannekoek wrote:
"When the [modern] astronomer
looks back at his predecessors,
he finds Babylonian priests and magicians,
Greek philosophers, Mohammedan princes,
medieval monks, Renaissance nobles and clerics—
until in scholars of the seventeenth century
he meets with modern citizens of his own kind.
To all of these... astronomy was not a limited
branch
of specialist science
but a world system interwoven
with the whole of their concept of life.
Not the traditional tasks of a professional
guild
but the deepest problems of humanity inspired
their work."
Do you agree with Pannekoek's description
of science as inspired by the deepest problems
of humanity? What is the most significant
implication of all you have learned this week?
