REVOLUTIONS IN SCIENCE

Press, Volume XCIX, Issue 29264, 23 July 1960, Page 15

REVOLUTIONS IN SCIENCE

Revolt Against Tradition

The revolutions in science must be seen as revolutions against the tyranny of traditional and accepted standards 'of common sense or alternatively “climates of opinion,” said Dr. A. W. Ross, senior lecturer in physics at the University of Canterbury, in a lunch horn: address at the University on “The Revolution in Science.” Climates of opinion were more often than ndt a bar to progress and had to be re-educated or ignored before a significant advance could be made. Copernicanism had to contend with a climate of opinion formed by fifteen centuries of exposure to Christian theology and the principles of Aristotle. Darwin’s theory of evolution was in conflict with man’s belief about his own significance, which were at least as old as the earliest extant writings, said Dr. Ross.

It was against the background of the influence of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas that the scientific revolution, begun in the sixteenth century by the publication by Copernicus of a book on planetary calculations, had to be reviewed. This book had been heretical, since it relegated the earth to the status of a planet moving round the sun; that it was not immediately banned was because of its technical nature and consequently restricted circulation. As Copernicanism was developed the basic heresies came to be more widely known and accepted. Eventually the Church reacted, prohibiting the teaching of the earth’s motion round the sun. The tragic consequence of this commitment to the earth’s immobility was an irrevocable damage to Catholic science and Church prestige. On the heels of the Copernican revolution came Newton. His laws became the basis of a mechanistic theory of the physical world which persisted until the nineteenth century, when it became clear that Newton’s theories could be followed to a point and no further.

The appearance of other fields whose existence was completely unexpected made a radically new approach necessary. The acceptance by modern scientists of this new approach constituted the modern revolution in science. The modern revolution in the physical sciences was against a tradition which went back a mere two and a half centuries, and succeeded therefore more readily in gaining acceptance. A scientist would, agree wholeheartedly that some of his ideas ran counter to his common sense, but he .would deny that his common sense should be the sole judge of whether an idea might aid scientific progress, said Dr. Ross. I

“The lesson then Is that we should not consider our standards of common sense, concerning the nature of thinks as absolutes, and we should not use our standards to form some unchangeable climates of opinion. The very nature of science, a seeking after knowledge and understanding, will bring it into conflict with a static climate of opinion,” Dr. Ross said.