1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
NeX [460]
2 years ago
7

Which practice was more likely to be accepted after the scientific revolution than before

History
1 answer:
natita [175]2 years ago
4 0

The question is incomplete but I have the entire one:

Which practice was more likely to be accepted after the scientific revolution than before?

A. Scientists deriving much of their knowledge from the Bible

B. Scientists claiming that the Earth was at the center of the solar

system

C. Scientists challenging traditional beliefs about the way the

universe works

D. Scientists attending universities controlled by the Catholic Church

Answer:

B). Scientists claiming that the Earth was at the center of the solar system.

What was revolutionary about the Scientific Revolution? How did the study of nature in the 16th century differ from the study of nature in the Middle Ages?

Disclaimer: I can only write with confidence about paradigm shifts between medieval and Renaissance alchemy.

Here's what Robert Boyle wrote in The Sceptical Chymist (1661):

And, to prevent mistakes, I must advertize you, that I now mean by elements, as those chymists that speak plainest do by their principles, certain primitive or simple, or perfectly unmingled bodies; which not being made of any other bodies, or of one another, are the ingredients of which all those called perfectly mixt bodies are immediately compounded, and into which they are ultimately resolved: now whether there be any such body to be constantly met with in all, and each, of those that are said to be elemented bodies, is the thing I now question.

[Note: I realize this is not from the 16th Century, but the 16th Century is just too soon if you want solid answers about the differences you are inquiring about.]

Bear with me here because this might get a bit out of hand.

In The Birth of the Clinic, Michel Foucault explains in great detail what he refers to as the "medical gaze" of the 19th Century. According to Foucault, the "medical gaze" was a state of mind in which physicians at the time were able to "gaze" upon any number of patients and read and interpret the various signs in order to determine the symptoms.

For example, let's say two patients have pneumonia, but one patient coughs violently whereas the other patient simply wheezes. Both possess the symptom of fluid in the lungs, but the signs are completely different.

For Foucault, the "medical gaze" represents a newfound perception of nature anticipating the advent of what we now call structural linguistics. In structural linguistics, language consists of two elements--the sign and the signified, where the sign is the symbol or word on the page and the signified is the meaning. According to Ferdinand de Saussure, the founder of structural linguistics, the sign is completely arbitrary: we agree to call red "red", but we could just as easily agree to call red "farfignuggen" and none would be the wiser.

So the signified is static, but the sign can be dynamic. This is the crux of the "medical gaze": regardless of how many different signs there are (coughing, wheezing, heaving breathing), the physician can still read and interpret those signs in order to determine the symptom (fluid in the lungs). The signs are dynamic, the symptom is static.

Now let's answer your question.

Up until Robert Boyle wrote The Sceptical Chymist, alchemists approached nature the same way physicians approached symptoms in the 19th Century.

During the Middle Ages, every aspect of nature--from wood to metal to the planets themselves--consisted of two opposing elements, Mercury and Sulphur. The problem is that the signs alchemists used to signify those elements changed as if based on the time of day. For one alchemist, Mercury was a woman bearing buckets of water from a well. For another, Mercury was a green lion. For others, Mercury was simply Quicksilver. The element remained the same (for the most part) all the way into the Renaissance, but the signs (woman with water, green lion, quicksilver, etc) changed constantly.

While the signs of symptoms changed based on patients' immune systems, the signs of Mercury changed based on which alchemist was writing about Mercury.

And while Foucault called attention to the "medical gaze" of the 19th Century, one could just as easily call attention to an "alchemist's gaze" of the Middle Ages and the Early Renaissance.

Robert Boyle changed all of that. He came out and he said, "Forget this fickleness! We need one sign and one sign only. And we need to agree! No more calling this element by ten different names. No more correspondence systems. We need to agree and we need to do it now."

Of course, I am paraphrasing in a rather silly way, but that's the gist of what he meant when he wrote the passage I quoted at the beginning. What eventually became a rising trend in medicine was an old trend in alchemy that needed to be quashed for completely different reasons.

So it's not a matter of how the 16th Century differed from the Middle Ages, but how the Late Renaissance called an end to the fickleness of the Natural Philosophy that preceded it.

You might be interested in
Which ruler united the feudal kingdoms of Germany under his reign?
e-lub [12.9K]
The answer is Otto I that untied the feudal kingdoms in Germany
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How did Britain respond to great depression
Ivanshal [37]
The British economy was already weak after WW1, so when the US stock market crashed, taxes were put on foreign imports. The value of British exports were halved, and many areas went into poverty (unemployment more than doubled) so Britain devalued their pound in 1931, which made goods cheaper and improved their economy.
6 0
3 years ago
Why was the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union established?
Ipatiy [6.2K]

to promote prohibition..........

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which of the following actions was not part of the federal government's early “civilization" policy?
xenn [34]

Answer:

D. accepting tribes equally into white  communities ,schools.and businesses

Explanation:

The u.s always thought of indigenous  people to be not civilized so they were never fully invited into american societies

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
HELP ASAP!!!! I'M DOING THE TEST NOW
ioda

Answer:

Battle of the Thames was won by William Henry Harrison, Battle of horseshoe bend was won by Andrew Jackson, Battle of New Orleans was won by Andrew Jackson, Battle of Put-in-bay was won by Oliver Perry, and battle of Tippecanoe was won by William Henry Harrison.

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • How did congress react to the defeat of the lodge bill?
    7·1 answer
  • What is the name of the two latitude lines that run parallel to the North and to the South of the Equator?
    9·1 answer
  • What were the strengths of the Articles of Confederation
    11·2 answers
  • the separatists fled from england because of ___ in the church of england A. crime B. overpopulation C. religious intolorence
    13·1 answer
  • What is the benefit of meditation to the students?​
    13·1 answer
  • Charles Mason and Jeremiah Dixon determined the border between these two colonies
    14·1 answer
  • List at least 4 similarities among the three sections of colonial america
    7·1 answer
  • Hello can someone pls help me with this question!!!!
    10·1 answer
  • Describe the boundary under the akbar period?​
    15·1 answer
  • Why would people in Eastern Europe<br> have collaborated with the Nazis?
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!