Greek Science After Aristotle (Paperback)

by G. E. R. Lloyd (Author)

Editorial Reviews

Product Description
Although there is no exct equivalent to our term "science" in Greek, Western science may still be said to originate with the Greeks. In this volume, the author discusses the fundamental Greek contributions to science, drawing on the rich literary and archaeological sources for the period after Aristotle. Particular attention is paid to the Greeks' conceptions of the inquiries they were engaged on, and to the interrelations of science and philosophy, science and religion, and science and technology. In the first part of the book the author considers the two hundred years after the death of Aristotle, devoting separate chapters to mathematics, astronomy, and biology. He goes on to deal with Ptolemy and Galen and concludes with a discussion of later writers and of the problems raised by the question of the decline of ancient science.

Product Details

• Paperback: 208 pages
• Publisher: W.W. Norton & Co. (August 17, 1975)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0393007804
• ISBN-13: 978-0393007800
• Product Dimensions: 7.5 x 5 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 4.8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #399,224 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

14 of 16 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Greek Science the second time around., June 24, 2000

By	Atheen M. Wilson "Atheen" (Mpls, MN United States) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

I'd read this book some years ago, but found it difficult going at the time. I decided to re-read it recently, as it was on the wish list of a friend which reminded me I still had the volume. This time around I found it much more interesting and more understandable. There definitely seems to be a time for everything, and apparently this was the time for Greek Science for me. What I found of particular interest was a new perspective that I acheived in a novel way. I recently attended a Minneapolis Childrens' Theater production featuring events from the life of Galileo. It was pointed out in the playbill that what seems to us in retrospect a patent persecution of a new concept by jealous intellectuals and religious authorities was not quite so clear cut at the time. In fact the scientific thinkers of Galileo's time, as those of the Hellanistic Greek and Roman times, labored with the technological inability to test the validity of scientific observations. Much that passed for science during those times might be considered philosophy or metaphysics in our own. Without the means of externally testing opposing explanations of natural phenomenon little of definitive worth could be said about any given observation. It then became a matter of philosophical orientation, of reputation and of religious sanction. It was in fact anybody's guess. We who are used to measuring equipment as simple as a thermometer and as complex as an earth orbiting satelite often forget that these devices were not yet available to the researchers of ancient or even medieaval times. Some of the simpler devices were only just being introduced in Galileo's time and were considered untested and highly suspect themselves. Given that a number of ingeneous inventions of early times were engineered with the specific intent to mislead or impress the public, the scepticism with which something like the telescope or the microscope were greeted is not surprising. To the early critic, one could not necessarily believe ones eyes; it was better to believe what the Holy Book or a learned philosopher had to say with respect to nature than what a "conjurer" might say. Greek Science After Aristotle makes this point apparent, explaning that only in the area of mathematics and in applied physics (engineering, especially military engineering) could anything like trustworthy precision be achieved. It also points out that though modern science values observation and experiment, the neglect of these was not necessarily due to a laziness or disregard for precision, but due to a lack of technological means. In fact, much was done and some very ingeneous devices to accomplish it were invented to perform it. The researchers of the times had to be very innovative and original in their approach to problem solving; something which we with our computerized devices are rarely called upon to do a such basic levels. Rereading the book from this perspective definitely gave me a greater appreciation for the achievments of our intellectual predecessors.