14.06.2013 Views

1 The Birth of Science - MSRI

1 The Birth of Science - MSRI

1 The Birth of Science - MSRI

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

158 6. <strong>The</strong> Hellenistic Scientific Method<br />

things can be understood without definition” — <strong>of</strong> presupposing, that is,<br />

the existence <strong>of</strong> some definitionless entities — was still taken into consideration<br />

in his time.<br />

How were the first Greek purely scientific terms, and therefore the first page 203<br />

theoretical entities <strong>of</strong> science, created? It is not hard to realize that the essential<br />

tools were provided by the postulates <strong>of</strong> the various theories and<br />

the hypothetico-deductive method. Take the first postulate <strong>of</strong> the Elements,<br />

for example. In Euclid’s text it reads, literally,<br />

Let it be demanded that a straight line be drawn [i.e., drawable] from<br />

every sign to every sign. 37<br />

This statement contains words from ordinary Greek, signifying concrete<br />

objects: “straight lines” are originally traces drawn or carved (the Greek<br />

word indicates this explicitly), the “signs” are equally concrete in<br />

nature, and the whole can be read as a sentence <strong>of</strong> ordinary language, with<br />

a clear meaning relating to the concrete activity <strong>of</strong> a draftsman. Naturally<br />

the draftsman can draw, for instance, a green or a red line, thicker or thinner,<br />

and make signs <strong>of</strong> different types. But now suppose that we take this<br />

sentence, together with the other four that Euclid wrote, as postulates in<br />

his theory based on the hypothetico-deductive method. Because none <strong>of</strong><br />

the postulates mentions color, clearly no proposition deducible from them<br />

can say anything about color. <strong>The</strong> “lines” <strong>of</strong> the theory are thus automatically<br />

colorless. <strong>The</strong> same can be said <strong>of</strong> their thickness or the shape <strong>of</strong><br />

the “signs”. In other words, the use <strong>of</strong> the hypothetico-deductive method<br />

automatically restricts the semantic extension <strong>of</strong> the terms used in the postulate,<br />

generating new entities that are “theoretical” in the sense that the<br />

only statements one can make about them are those deducible from the<br />

postulates <strong>of</strong> the theory.<br />

Another example: in the Optics, again <strong>of</strong> Euclid, the initial assumptions<br />

<strong>of</strong> the theory contain an essential term, opsis, which in Section 3.1 we translated<br />

as “visual ray”. <strong>The</strong> meanings <strong>of</strong> the word in Greek are manifold:<br />

view, aspect, image, spectacle; or yet, in an active sense, sight, look, organs<br />

<strong>of</strong> sight; it can even mean the “evil eye”. 38 In natural philosophy page 204<br />

there were various doctrines <strong>of</strong> sight based on the idea that an opsis was<br />

something actually emitted from the eye. In the Euclidean theory all <strong>of</strong><br />

that no longer matters; all these possible meanings <strong>of</strong> the term, since they<br />

do not play a role in the theory’s assumptions, are automatically eliminated<br />

from the theory itself. <strong>The</strong> visual rays <strong>of</strong> Euclidean optics are completely<br />

characterized as entities that associate (according to precise rules)<br />

37 ¨ ¨ <br />

38 Plutarch, Quaestionum convivialium libri vi, 681A.<br />

Revision: 1.7 Date: 2002/09/14 23:17:37

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!