Talk:Science

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 March 2021 and 4 June 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Shady2021 (article contribs).

Greek conceptions

Saying that new ideas and discoveries completely departed from the Ancient Greek conceptions is false. That's how it looks like at least. (which was later transformed by the Scientific Revolution that began in the 16th century as new ideas and discoveries departed from previous Greek conceptions and traditions). Mathematics, Astronomy, Medicine and tons of others branches of science which the Greeks started (or at least made better) for example we talk about Galen when it comes to medicine, but not about Hippocrates. We still use his methods. We talk about mathematics when Galileo himself called Archimedes his master, and we still learn everything about Euclidean geometry/and the other great Greek mathematicians. We talk about astronomy when Kepler himself called Pythagoras the grandfather of all Copernicans. We talk about astronomy when Copernicus was influenced by Aristarchus' heliocentric model. We talk about Newton when his studies were based on Aristotle and was certainly influenced by him a lot (Although Newton is a beast and made completely new things, but I think you know how I mean it). I just point out these 3 because I think that they're core of the scientific revolution. Adding many would be much better. I'm sure you didn't want to mean "all" or whatever, but im repeating, that's how it looks like. Holloman123 (talk) 15:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

See H. Floris Cohen (2010) How modern science came into the world: four civilizations, one 17th century breakthrough ISBN 9789089642394 . H. Floris Cohen is a Dutchman and historiographer. He might serve as a secondary or tertiary source for the article. He also wrote (1994) The Scientific Revolution: A Historiographical Inquiry. The 1994 book started with 60 ideas which he reviewed for their influence on Scientific Revolutions. Its last chapter served as the basis for his 2010 book, which he began in 1994. There are multiple sources for science, and the Greeks were only a part of the story. --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 16:00, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

I never said the opposite. What you replied has nothing to do with my basic statement sir (that science never got completely departed from Greek conceptions). Thanks. Holloman123 (talk) 16:15, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

@Holloman123: We're talking about new ideas and discoveries. When we say depart, we mean to move away or to deviate [1]. No comment is made on "how much" deviation there was. The problem is if you were to add many, then you're implying that at least one or some "new" ideas/discoveries (e.g., heliocentrism, scientific method, Boyle's Law) did not depart from earlier Greek conceptions (e.g., Geocentric model, Classical elements)? That's a different issue entirely from the one you raise, which is "they deviated but not completely." You see the difference here? danielkueh (talk) 18:10, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Alright. I understand the difference of the deviation you are referring to here, (even tho I still have some notes, but anyway). You can delete this section if you wish. Cheers. Holloman123 (talk) 18:28, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 June 2021

Citation [109] refers to a web archive and a dead link. The dead link has now been redirected to a new unrelated site using 301. The original source can no longer be accessed anywhere on the web because of the redirect. It is causing confusion and it appears to be a spammy practice. HarrisonFisher1982 (talk) 12:00, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Link_rot/URL_change_requests#seedmagazine.com_-_defunct_site_with_unexpected_link_redirects. Melmann 19:01, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 June 2021 (2)

From:

Each of these branches comprises various specialized yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own nomenclature and expertise.

To:

Each of these branches comprises various specialized yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own nomenclature and expertise. HarrisonFisher1982 (talk) 12:23, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: I have requested that these links be mass fixed. See Wikipedia:Link_rot/URL_change_requests#seedmagazine.com_-_defunct_site_with_unexpected_link_redirects. Please avoid taking action on this until the request is dealt with there. Melmann 19:01, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

References

 Note: Links to old Seed Magazine's website have been cleaned up sitewide by GreenC. Melmann 21:48, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Science in India is missing

In this article, there is absolutely no mention of scientific achievements in India. There is another article for scientific achievements of India- but this article should have at least the major scientific achievements of India in brief- to present a neutral view. I once added scientific achievements in India with sources but somebody deleted it and said that it was "fringe". Subhobrata Chakravorti (talk) 11:36, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

This article currently has no specific sections about any national achievements because it's topic is the current western science which is now globally "science". It is not meant to be a collection of achievements. The historical sections therefore tend to focus only on "achievements" in as far as they were leading towards that type of science which we all use today. This does raise concerns sometimes, but are there specific achievements you think were important in leading to science as it exists today? I am not sure it makes sense to just insert sentences saying "India is notable".--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:03, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Well Aryabhatta is quite an important figure when it comes to astronomy. 223.184.77.204 (talk) 12:53, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 November 2021

Ranjanroyrr (talk) 02:23, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

There is another factor to keep in mind when evaluating Newton's contributions. We have seen that the time of [[2]] came soon after the Renaissance in Europe. We have seen in the previous installment that people like Galileo, Astronomer, Physicist and Engineer, René Descartes, French philosopher, Mathematician, Scientist created a great deal of science during the Renaissance. Took a new path The change happened with incredible swiftness: The book of Copernicus was published in 1543, Galileo died in 1642 and Newton was born in the same year. Thus, after a millennium of unquestioning religious dogma, the "Age of Reason" took root in a section of people within a short span of only a hundred years. But most of the population was still under the influence of the Church. - Catholic as well as Protestant. Religious obscenity, bigotry and superstition were still ruling the minds of the common people. Only among a section of learned people were the seeds of doubt sown about the correctness of the beliefs propagated by the Church. The central belief that everything in the world is created and controlled by God was still intact. Universities were still centers of dry scholarship.