Post by okieinnormanok on Jan 5, 2022 17:53:01 GMT
I recently read book "Seven Brief Lessons on Magic" by Paul Tyson, 2019, which which deals with Faith, science, platonism, modernity, and on. The author divides the word in to metaphysical types (magic) 1) animism 2) platonism -truth transcendant and immanent 3) supernatural, meaning outside the world in Creator 4) anti-magic secularism no meaning anywhere. There were some amazing mistakes, but my response is mainly to his use or misuse of history of science, medieval and early modern science. His history of the 4 metaphysics is 1) animism first 2) Plato 500 bc early middle ages 500-1000 pro platonic then 3) the supernatural (the church) idea of natural law, limiting God' power, in medieval scholars and science, creating a dualism between nature and meaning which persists and is the cause of the rise of early modern science. 4) after rise of modern science, a purely secular nature only culture arrives. both 3 and 4) seem almost indistinguishable siblings. An objection among others, is to this historical 4 parted theme. The explanations of why modern science developed over many years are very many, I read books on the continuity of medieval science and early modern science. This broad brush theory of the origin of modern science seems pretty baseless and speculative. He says he doesn't believe in the conflict theory of science and religion, but I think his suffuse and a-historical approach abuses, and trashes reputations of both history of science, and the Faith and Science non-conflict theory. He says after fall of platonism, natural law leads to dualism, and finally to disconnects meaning and science, and then to eco-catastrophy, The other topic is a romantic notion of pre-literate native consciousness, recalling julian janes and The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the bicameral mind. Plato and his timaeus is THE scientist for the middle ages before 1200. the "story of platonism being displaced by dualism" is a muddy and tortured notion to me.