It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by onequestion
reply to post by chr0naut
How do you think "science" was developed?
Right or left
Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by l_e_cox
Philosophy is both the parent of science and of the empirical method.
Philosophy became separated from science when philosophers in academic settings became pompous discussers of other peoples philosophy most interested in getting tenure, and when scientists became dogmatic calculators with rigid minds and little imagination most interested in getting funding.
Of course there are exceptions in both fields.
"Scientists" love to pat themselves on their back for their superiority, even though its taken them nearly 2000 years to reproduce some of the thinking of the philosophers of Greece, who already understood the principles of natural selection, atomic theory, and were building calculators.
Originally posted by TheDebunkMachine
The other two are correct, but there is no evidence whatsoever that ancient greek philosophers had any clue about atomic theory
The theory of Democritus and Leucippus held that everything is composed of "atoms", which are physically, but not geometrically, indivisible; that between atoms lies empty space; that atoms are indestructible; have always been, and always will be, in motion; that there are an infinite number of atoms, and kinds of atoms, which differ in shape, and size. Of the mass of atoms, Democritus said "The more any indivisible exceeds, the heavier it is." But his exact position on weight of atoms is disputed.
Leucippus is widely credited with being the first to develop the theory of atomism, although Isaac Newton preferred to credit the obscure Moschus the Phoenician (whom he believed to be the biblical Moses) as the inventor of the idea on the authority of Posidonius and Strabo. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy notes, "This theologically motivated view does not seem to claim much historical evidence, however."