The Scientific Method

[selfAdjoint]

The philosophy of art has always about expressing concepts in geometrical terms. Science has followed that path.

That doesn't descibe any philosophy of art that I know about. Do you mean perspective? Not a philosophy but one among many techniques.

And as for science, some physicists have been high on geometry and others couldn't seee it for sour apples. And that only described physics anyway.

 

[arildno]

I think he thought my pet theory was idiotic, and provided his own..
(Pets are usually both cute and simple-minded; it's part of their charm,IMO)

 

[selfAdjoint]

I think he thought my pet theory was idiotic, and provided his own..
(Pets are usually both cute and simple-minded; it's part of their charm,IMO)

My own response to your pet theory is that it only applies to the city-state period of Greek history, and somewhat misrepresents that. The existence of quite a few philosophers in the city-states does not refute, but does stress your theory. In the hellenistic period the situation was different. Large monarchies and empires dominated the political landscape and bureaucracy was well developed. Professional educators, astronomers, and librarians appeared. Eratosthenes and Hipparchus were both in the employ of the Ptolemaic empire.

 

[arildno]

You are certainly right about the Hellenistic period; it was, I believe, the most interesting period in Greece from a strictly scientific point of view.

As to the "classical" city-state period (i.e, the time of Pericles/Socrates), I think Aristophanes' scathing portrayals of philosophers ("The Clouds" in particular) are more representative of what people thought about the philosophers, than whatever the philosophers themselves wanted.
In tenuous connection with this, I believe the sophists, whose primary work was teaching rhetoric (politician-grooming) were much better regarded among the populace than philosophers like Socrates/Plato (that is, I believe, the personal /(real?) reason why Plato disliked them..)

 

[geometer]

How about this for a thought - The scientific method we know today came about as a result of the character of western religious philosophy. The belief in a single God who created the universe with a set of unchanging laws that govern it prompted the search for those laws. (I wrote a paper in college, for a physics class no less, with this as the theme)

 

[arildno]

I never said my pet theory was in any way sufficient; I do think your point has a lot of relevance.
I do think it is somewhat easier within the framework of a monotheistic religion to lend credibility to the idea that natural laws are immutable.
It is, however, a bit too easy to jump to your (and my) conclusion; "the set of unchanging laws" wasn't a particularly prevalent idea in early Christianity.
Which means:
There's a long way still to go..