Does science transcend culture?
|Title:||Does science transcend culture?|
|Authors:||Custance, Arthur C.|
|Abstract:||This is a study of whether Science DOES transcend Culture naturally--not whether it CAN do so. That Science can be adopted into any culture is clear from modern history (as in China today). That Science does not automatically develop even when a Culture has reached a high level of technical achievement (as in modern China) or intellectual sophistication (as in ancient Greece) is also clear from history. Evidently Science and Technology are not the same thing, for none of these high Cultures ever succeeded in crossing the threshold into an Industrial Revolution. Yet it did appear in Europe where Technology is not particularly remarkable, but Philosophy is. Research has shown that non-Indo-Europeans are highly inventive and responsible for all basic Technology, but are quite un-philosophical. On the other hand, Indo-Europeans are quite uninventive but philosophically inclined and responsible for all philosophical systems. Neither Philosophy nor Technology alone is capable of producing Science. Only when Philosophy is applied to Technology does Science arise. An examination of the reasons for these circumstances constitutes the subject of this thesis. To the question, Can Science transcend Culture, the answer would be unquestionably, Yes. To the question, Does Science transcend Culture, the answer apparently is NO. Science can transcend Culture but apparently it does not by nature do so. It thus appears to be an activity that is culturally conditioned. The interrelationship between language and thought is explored: evidence show that non-Indo-European languages do not permit or encourage speculation of a philosophical nature, whereas Indo-European languages do. How did this bifurcation come about and what factors tend to preserve it? Did language predetermine thought patterns, or has some mental characteristic, possibly genetically determined, been responsible for the structure of language? The possible relevance of all this in terms of educational methods is considered. By formulating precisely the relationships between Philosophy, Technology, and Science, and by giving attention to the part which the structure of Language plays in these relationships, it is hoped to give some direction to the content of Education needed to train and equip Scientists.|
|Collection||Thèses, 1910 - 2010 // Theses, 1910 - 2010|