Part 4

Science​—Mankind’s Ongoing Search for Truth

Revival of Science by Revolution

TURBULENCE struck the world during the second half of the 18th century as revolutions changed the political landscape, first in America, then in France. Meanwhile, in England a different kind of revolution began, the industrial revolution. It had much to do with another kind of revolution, a scientific one.

Some date the rebirth of science from the 1540’s, when Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus and Belgian anatomist Andreas Vesalius published books that profoundly affected scientific thinking. Others place the change earlier, in 1452, when Leonardo da Vinci was born. An incessant experimenter who made numerous scientific contributions, Leonardo developed ideas that were in some cases the seeds of inventions perfected centuries later, such as the airplane, the military tank, and the parachute.

But science as we now know it, says Ernest Nagel, professor emeritus at Columbia University, “did not become firmly established as a continuing institution in Western society until the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.” Once it did, a major turning point in human history had been reached. Notes the book The Scientist: “Between roughly 1590 and 1690 a host of geniuses . . . produced a flowering of research scarcely equalled in any other 100-year period.”

Villains Darken the Path

Pseudosciences also flourished, like villains whose incorrect theories stood in the way of genuine scientific advancement. The phlogiston theory was one of these. “Phlogiston,” from the Greek, means “burned.” It was introduced in 1702 by George Ernst Stahl, who held that phlogiston was released when combustible materials burned. He thought of it as a principle rather than as a real substance, but the belief that it was an actual substance grew over the years. Not until between 1770 and 1790 was Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier able to discredit this theory.

The Book of Popular Science admits that while the phlogiston theory “was utterly wrong, yet for a time it provided a working hypothesis that apparently explained many natural phenomena. It was simply one of many scientific hypotheses that have been tried in the balance and that have been found wanting in the course of the years.”

Alchemy was another villain. Harrap’s Illustrated Dictionary of Science defines it as “a blend of philosophy, mysticism and chemical technology, originating before the Christian era, seeking variously the conversion of base metals into gold, the prolongation of life and the secret of immortality.” Before being rejected, alchemy helped lay the foundation for modern chemistry, a transformation that was completed by the end of the 17th century.

So although villains, the phlogiston theory and alchemy were not without redeeming value. Not so, however, the human villains who because of religious persuasion fostered antiscientific attitudes. Rivalry between science and theology​—both professing to be the sole authority on questions of the universe—​has often led to outright confrontation.

For example, in the second century C.E., the renowned astronomer Ptolemy devised the geocentric theory, meaning that while the planets revolve in a circle, the center of the circle, called the epicycle, also moves on the circumference of another circle. It was mathematical ingenuity at its best and was an explanation of the apparent movement in the sky of the sun, moon, planets, and stars that was widely accepted until the 16th century.

Copernicus (1473-1543) developed an alternative theory. He believed that whereas the planets, including the earth, revolve around the sun, the sun is at rest. This idea​—a moving earth no longer the center of the universe—​if true, would have far-reaching consequences. Less than a hundred years later, Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei through telescopes made observations that convinced him that the Copernican hypothesis of an earth revolving around the sun was indeed true. But the Catholic Church rejected Galileo’s views as heretical and forced him to recant.

Religious errors had caused church theologians to deny scientific truth. Not until almost 360 years later did the church clear Galileo. L’Osservatore Romano, in its weekly edition of November 4, 1992, acknowledged “subjective error of judgement” in the case against Galileo.

Villains Still Exist

Likewise, in this 20th century, the religions of Christendom display a similar disrespect for truth. This they do by giving preference to unproved scientific theories in the face of truth, both scientific and religious. The best example is the unprovable theory of evolution, basically the illegitimate offspring of seriously flawed scientific “knowledge” and false religious teachings.a

Charles Darwin published his book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection on November 24, 1859. But the idea of evolution actually stems from pre-Christian times. For example, Greek philosopher Aristotle pictured man at the top of a line evolving from lower animal life. At first, clergymen rejected Darwin’s theory, but The Book of Popular Science notes: “Evolution [later] became something more than a scientific theory . . . It became a battle cry and even a philosophy.” The idea of survival of the fittest appealed to people striving to get to the top of the ladder.

Clergy resistance soon withered. The Encyclopedia of Religion says that “Darwin’s theory of evolution achieved not merely acceptance but resounding acclaim,” and that “by the time of his death in [1882], most thoughtful and articulate clergy had worked their way to the conclusion that evolution was wholly compatible with an enlightened understanding of scripture.”

This despite the following admission by The Book of Popular Science: “Even the firmest supporters of the doctrine of organic evolution had to concede that there were glaring inaccuracies and gaps in Darwin’s original theory.” Saying that “much of Darwin’s original theory has been revamped or discarded,” the book nevertheless says that evolution’s “influence upon almost every field of human activity has been very great. History, archaeology and ethnology have undergone profound changes because of the theory.”

Today, many thoughtful scientists seriously question the theory of evolution. Sir Fred Hoyle, founder of the Cambridge Institute of Theoretical Astronomy and associate member of the American National Academy of Sciences, wrote some ten years ago: “Personally, I have little doubt that scientific historians of the future will find it mysterious that a theory which could be seen to be unworkable came to be so widely believed.”

Striking as it does at the very basis of human existence, evolution robs the Creator of his due. It also belies its claim to be scientific and does no credit to mankind’s ongoing search for scientific truth. Karl Marx was glad to embrace evolution and ‘survival of the fittest’ to bolster the rise of Communism. But evolution is a villain of the vilest kind.

Who Are the Victims?

Anyone misled into believing pseudoscientific theories becomes a victim. But even believing scientific truths poses a danger. The spectacular scientific advances resulting from the scientific revolution deceived many into believing that now nothing was beyond reach.

This belief was intensified as scientific progress continued to erode the antiscientific attitude false religion had once fostered. Commerce and politics began recognizing science as a powerful tool to be used in achieving their goals, be it monetary reward or consolidation of political power.

Clearly stated, science was slowly developing into a god, giving rise to scientism. Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary defines this as “an exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods of natural science applied to all areas of investigation.”

As the 19th century drew to a close, people wondered what the 20th century would bring. Would science establish the “veritable heaven on earth” many thought it capable of producing? Or would its villains continue to strew the revolution’s battlefield with the tangled bodies of additional victims? “Working 20th-Century ‘Magic,’” appearing in our next issue, will answer.

[Footnotes]

[Box on page 14]

At the Pull of a Plug

AS RECENT as the early 19th century, electricity was considered an interesting phenomenon but with little practical use. Men from different countries and various backgrounds, including H. C. Ørsted (1777-1851), M. Faraday (1791-1867), A. Ampère (1775-1836), and B. Franklin (1706-90), made important discoveries, however, that proved otherwise, thereby laying the foundation for today’s world of electricity​—the world that at the pull of a plug stops dead in its tracks.

[Pictures on page 15]

Nicolaus Copernicus

Galileo Galilei

[Credit Line]

Photos taken from Giordano Bruno and Galilei (German edition)