Plato's 3 Worldviews
Worldviews are viewed to be composed of core and peripheral beliefs. Critically assess the implications of changes in such core and peripheral beliefs (Aristotelian, Newtonian, Einsteinian), for our understanding of scientific inquiry, particularly in light of Karl Popper’s theory of falsification.
Over the course of history the world has developed and taken many paths to reach where we are today. Collectively, we all influence the direction of our society, morals, views and more significantly, our belief system. The stages in the development of our belief system can be identified easily enough by certain periods in history, more specifically, by certain individuals. We will be focusing primarily on 3 worldviews, their distinctions, societal …show more content…
Plato believed the world was the very opposite of “ideal” and was very messy. As a result, it was impossible to derive simple equations to answer questions of a physical nature. Aristotle, on the other hand, held a similar view to Plato, but he recognised the ability to classify a subset of these “messy” problems into algebraically measurable problems, such that practical complications could be solved. This approach is what we might call “applied science” and his equations would be confirmed through demonstration and experimentation. Of course, this practical scientific approach was encouraged by the masses, as it contributed in many areas, particularly architecture. Whereas Plato’s approach to knowledge and science was a bit more of a practical “cop-out”.
We can see mathematics as one of the purest forms of knowledge and science, which to Plato was the ultimate goal. But to use mathematics to produce solutions to a physical system at its purest level would require overwhelmingly complex maths, considering the number of variables in the system. This is why Physics would be considered the next level of purity. Applying basic trigonometrical mathematics to an architectural project is more than sufficient, and it’s very rare we need to introduce variables such as the building materials into these …show more content…
He defined axioms of force and derived mathematical equations to define the laws of motion, to the point where they could be applied in practice, as Aristotle had envisioned. The geocentric model that Aristotle had adopted was scrapped to allow for a new and improved understanding of the universe. It was through mathematical inconsistency that this new worldview was created. Through the falsification of previous theories.
As Newton was so ahead of his time, It took nearly 300 years before his laws were put into questioning. Many people had forgotten the importance of scientific skepticism and curiosity, and Newton’s laws were seen as being totally pure. Einstein’s curiosity and thought experiments had led him to believe there was more to the physical laws of motion than Newton had
Over the course of history the world has developed and taken many paths to reach where we are today. Collectively, we all influence the direction of our society, morals, views and more significantly, our belief system. The stages in the development of our belief system can be identified easily enough by certain periods in history, more specifically, by certain individuals. We will be focusing primarily on 3 worldviews, their distinctions, societal …show more content…
Plato believed the world was the very opposite of “ideal” and was very messy. As a result, it was impossible to derive simple equations to answer questions of a physical nature. Aristotle, on the other hand, held a similar view to Plato, but he recognised the ability to classify a subset of these “messy” problems into algebraically measurable problems, such that practical complications could be solved. This approach is what we might call “applied science” and his equations would be confirmed through demonstration and experimentation. Of course, this practical scientific approach was encouraged by the masses, as it contributed in many areas, particularly architecture. Whereas Plato’s approach to knowledge and science was a bit more of a practical “cop-out”.
We can see mathematics as one of the purest forms of knowledge and science, which to Plato was the ultimate goal. But to use mathematics to produce solutions to a physical system at its purest level would require overwhelmingly complex maths, considering the number of variables in the system. This is why Physics would be considered the next level of purity. Applying basic trigonometrical mathematics to an architectural project is more than sufficient, and it’s very rare we need to introduce variables such as the building materials into these …show more content…
He defined axioms of force and derived mathematical equations to define the laws of motion, to the point where they could be applied in practice, as Aristotle had envisioned. The geocentric model that Aristotle had adopted was scrapped to allow for a new and improved understanding of the universe. It was through mathematical inconsistency that this new worldview was created. Through the falsification of previous theories.
As Newton was so ahead of his time, It took nearly 300 years before his laws were put into questioning. Many people had forgotten the importance of scientific skepticism and curiosity, and Newton’s laws were seen as being totally pure. Einstein’s curiosity and thought experiments had led him to believe there was more to the physical laws of motion than Newton had