Evidence for God from Science

Paul,

I wasn't aware of that James Hannam book, I was referring to his God's Philosophers: How the Medieval World Laid the Foundations of Modern Science which is in the same vein by the sounds of things. The smithing of the middle ages, the occasional Ulfberht sword aside, pales in comparisson to that of the east, the Japanese in particular...they are still at the top of class as far as steel production goes with thier Hitachi white steel and carbon steels to die for. Yeah it's nice they stumbled upon blast furnaces and mechanical clocks long after the Chinese but being behind other cultures in some repects is not an awesome achievement. The point is not so much that they didn't lay foundations for modern science but that they done so rather slowly in contrast to the period that followed. The art of the period reflects this too, each to his own but the burst of creativity in art that also marks the closure of the middle ages is awesome to behold......the art of the middle ages is pretty dull in contrast to the delights of Michelangelo and co which followed. Vasari's Lives of the Artists gives a nice commentary on this

Opinion aside, and that is simply what you have right now, your opinion, the FACTS show that there were no "dark ages" and that the medieval times were the BASE, the foundation for what came after.
To deny that is to deny history.
By the way, the reason that Japanese metallurgy in regards to swords was superior was a combination of reasons:
The samurai class demanded not only the best quality blades BUT art works too ( Many a crappy blade was made during those times too by the way).
The shift in the west to firearms and distance weapons because of they kind of warfare and the use of plate Armour dictated that swords be viewed accordingly.
There was no "stumbling" upon blast furnaces and mechanical clocks, that just a sly comment on your part that doesn't take into account the realities of what were INNOVATIONS, not inventions.

Just seems like you simply WANT to believe that there were "dark ages" and that the medieval era was "ignorant and stagnant".

Jac,

Thought if I took a little time off and reread you post I would see it in a more charitable light, unfortunately this is not the case. You linked to a definition of silly? really? Aristotle's views on the rational man, beasts of burden, slavery, barbarians and his apporach to life itself have influecned and given rational justification for the abuses of humans and animals for thousands of years. Aquinas with his kinship more with imaginied angels than other life on earth or the earth itself compounded the issue even further. Bentham's description of natural law as nonsense on stilts made the world a better place. Maybe we can salvage some of his metaphysics but I'm glad we took the step in ditching Aristotle. If proper or real metaphysics enables us to see things as they are more closely why do Aristotle & Aquinas display such warped views of the world around them....we can give them some leeway as they lived in a world proir to the insights gained from ignoring them. Modern geogloy and biology they did not have access to. It is difficult to extend such excuses to someone educated and living in the current world but it does seem that if you can rationaize no animal death before the fall and an earth only a few hundred thoudsand years old that with a sufficiently large brain anything can be rationalized given the time and enthusiasm. Whilst it took quite a while to break Newton's laws the laws of modern physics have been broken since thier inception...we can't harmonize gravity with the other theories.....that it seems you can't swallow modern geology and biology and instead appeal to broken and misundertstood physics to support your metaphysics is a little worrying. Sure Aristotle's actuality and potentiality has the potential to be useful it's just that in 2500 thousand years it hasn't realised that potentional as yet. It seems no more in keeping with the modern world than the yin/yang philosophy of the ancient Chinese.

I'll leave you with Bertrand Russell:

It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence which could support this.

If only he had lived long enough to meet you.

Paul,

Not meaning to be be sly but with steel being traded and the occasional Ulfberht swords being found it seems reasonble to suggest that the blast funances and steel production being in use for 1000 years plus elsewhere and the trading of goods between Europe and these places that there may have also been an exchange of ideas. Whilst crap blades, art, philosophy etc happens everywhere we tend to look at the better examples. The genius of Michangelo is not tarred by the discovery of some crappy art around that time too, nor does it detract from the infleunce of stumbling across the Lacoon either.
Yes, the middles ages were the base of what followed as last week was the basis for this week. It kinda feels like you are forcing a binary option, either those time were truly awesome or people were rolling around the mud Monty Python style. There were advances, there were great men but many of the advances were ones already found earlier elsewhere and many of the advancements were pretty slow and steady over a loing period of time.

Of course you couldn't. I already pointed out why in my last post. You just pointed out once again your abysmal misunderstanding of the men you would critique, and your citation of Russell on the matter is more laughable still (as his foolishness on this matter has been demonstrated and is widely recognized in the field). Usually, I see the benefits of these conversations with folks such as you as for the benefit of others. In this case, the benefit was entirely mine.

I found it beneficial too. Perhaps we can chat again one day once I've got a better understanding of philosophy in general. You've given me a least a lot of pointers as to areas I need to look into. Maybe in the future I'll be able to more clearly disentangle the sufferring & silliness that Aristotle & Aquinas bequeathed to us from a more profound worldview that lurks beneath. I'm glad we ditched Aristotle wholesale and I think we benefitted greatly from doing so but it may well have been a case of ditching both baby and bathwater. Some things we take to and some we do not. Many of the pre-Soctratics, the Indians, the Chinese, the Japanese & a good deal of modern western philosophers chime in with the world I experience. Socrates was wise, his students less so. Thanks for the time, I appreciate it even it was intended for the benefit of others.