Natural History: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Natural history]] and [[natural philosophy]] together form the principle branches of [[natural science]]. They begin in [[CL 3|Iron age cultures]] as an attempt to better understand [[nature]] by way of a [[reflection]] that no longer interprets natural phenomena in terms of the will of the [[deity|gods]]. [[Natural philosophers]], or [[naturalists]], seek to unshackle themselves from received opinion to the end of describing natural phenomena on the bases of observation. The authority of observation | [[Natural history]] and [[natural philosophy]] together form the principle branches of [[natural science]]. They begin in [[CL 3|Iron age cultures]] as an attempt to better understand [[nature]] by way of a [[reflection]] that no longer interprets natural phenomena in terms of the will of the [[deity|gods]]. [[Natural philosophers]], or [[naturalists]], seek to unshackle themselves from received opinion to the end of describing natural phenomena on the bases of careful observation. The authority of this observation is deemed, in the case of conflict, to trump that of [[religion]] and [[theology]]. | ||
The description of natural phenomena offered by natural history is not experiment based. Natural historians may well engage in [[dissection]] and even [[vivisection]] to get a better look at the everyday operations of nature, but they have little inclination to impose highly artificial environments upon the natural phenomena that they study. To the eye of the natural historian, the rigorous control of variables achievable through [[experimentation]] casts a light that distorts more than it clarifies. In the search for knowledge, those willing to vex nature, like those willing to torture prisoners, deceive themselves by posing leading questions and accepting convenient answers. For their part, natural philosophers seek in their descriptions to do justice to nature as it presents itself to their attentive eyes. And they seek to classify the variety of natural phenomena on the basis of their careful descriptions. | |||
Natural history and natural philosophy are precursors of [[modern science]]. In particular, natural history is the precursor of [[biology]] and [[geology]], and natural philosophy is a precursor of [[chemistry]] and [[physics]]. Natural historians do not draw rigorous distinctions between [[life]] and its [[environment]]. For them the study of [[animals]], or of [[plants], or of [[minerals]] is not a matter of specialization such the price of dedicating oneself to one field is incompetence in the others. Research within the different branches of natural history remains united by common goals and a common language. Consequently, natural history remains eminently accessible to the amateur enthusiast. It is only in [[CL 9|Renaissance]] age cultures that corpus of natural science begins to succumb to a dismemberment by ways of an emerging experimental based science that yields results which are at once of great consequence within a given field and are of no import outside it. | |||
Although Pliny did not distinguish between fact, opinion, and speculation in his 37-volume treatise, he can be credited with the creation of the first scientific encyclopaedia. For centuries the Natural History served as the Western world’s primary source of scientific information and theory. | Although Pliny did not distinguish between fact, opinion, and speculation in his 37-volume treatise, he can be credited with the creation of the first scientific encyclopaedia. For centuries the Natural History served as the Western world’s primary source of scientific information and theory. | ||
Revision as of 13:56, 12 November 2012
Natural history and natural philosophy together form the principle branches of natural science. They begin in Iron age cultures as an attempt to better understand nature by way of a reflection that no longer interprets natural phenomena in terms of the will of the gods. Natural philosophers, or naturalists, seek to unshackle themselves from received opinion to the end of describing natural phenomena on the bases of careful observation. The authority of this observation is deemed, in the case of conflict, to trump that of religion and theology.
The description of natural phenomena offered by natural history is not experiment based. Natural historians may well engage in dissection and even vivisection to get a better look at the everyday operations of nature, but they have little inclination to impose highly artificial environments upon the natural phenomena that they study. To the eye of the natural historian, the rigorous control of variables achievable through experimentation casts a light that distorts more than it clarifies. In the search for knowledge, those willing to vex nature, like those willing to torture prisoners, deceive themselves by posing leading questions and accepting convenient answers. For their part, natural philosophers seek in their descriptions to do justice to nature as it presents itself to their attentive eyes. And they seek to classify the variety of natural phenomena on the basis of their careful descriptions.
Natural history and natural philosophy are precursors of modern science. In particular, natural history is the precursor of biology and geology, and natural philosophy is a precursor of chemistry and physics. Natural historians do not draw rigorous distinctions between life and its environment. For them the study of animals, or of [[plants], or of minerals is not a matter of specialization such the price of dedicating oneself to one field is incompetence in the others. Research within the different branches of natural history remains united by common goals and a common language. Consequently, natural history remains eminently accessible to the amateur enthusiast. It is only in Renaissance age cultures that corpus of natural science begins to succumb to a dismemberment by ways of an emerging experimental based science that yields results which are at once of great consequence within a given field and are of no import outside it.
Although Pliny did not distinguish between fact, opinion, and speculation in his 37-volume treatise, he can be credited with the creation of the first scientific encyclopaedia. For centuries the Natural History served as the Western world’s primary source of scientific information and theory.
Book I summarizes the entire contents of the work, listing the authors and sometimes the titles of the books (many of which are now lost) from which Pliny derived his material. Book II is devoted to astronomy; Books III through VI, geography; VII through XI, zoology; XII through XIX, botany—and it is here that Pliny made his most substantial scientific contribution; XX through XXXII, medicine, including many moralistic comments on the deleterious effects of high living; and XXXIII through XXXVII, geology and mineralogy.
