The topic for this week is science between the middle ages and the Scientific Revolution. Although the end of the middle ages can be dated much earlier for some purposes, for our purposes it is natural to count it as about 1500. Since the Scientific Revolution is in full swing by the early 1600s, that means that this week will concern the sixteenth century. My intent was to divide things up so that we look at astronomy on Tues and other topics on Thurs. Our texts are organized in a way that prevents a perfect division of reading along these lines, but we can come close by looking at the end of Kuhn's ch. 4 and Dear's ch. 1 on Tues and looking at Dear's ch. 2 and the first two sections of his ch. 3 on Thurs. So I'll suggest you divide up the reading as follows:

Tues: Kuhn pp. 123-133 and Dear pp. 10-29;
Thurs: Dear, pp. 30-57.

Tuesday (9/13). As you read Kuhn and Dear, think about the intellectual context in which Copernicus found himself in the mid-16th century, both within astronomy and in external influences on it. There will be some overlap between Kuhn and Dear say about this and between Dear and things you've already read in Kuhn and Aristotle. A second perspective on the same material can be useful but look also for things that are new. Let me suggest just a couple of things to concentrate on. In Kuhn, look for the discussion of Neoplatonism. This was probably the most characteristic philosophical position of the 16th century but it has ancient roots and had influenced views of astronomy already in the time of Ptolemy. Look also for what Dear says about the status of astronomy (as opposed to cosmology) in the period before Copernicus. Finally, this will be a good time to look back at the last section of Kuhn's chapter 2 (pp. 73-77) and discuss what he says there about why it took so long for the Copernican revolution to occur.

Thursday (9/15). Dear will have some things to say about Copernicus (who was, after all, part of the 16th century) but, since we will be looking at him more closely the following week, I'll suggest you concentrate on other things. In particular, pay attention to the status of mathematics, what Dear says about alchemy, and what Dear calls "craft knowledge." These overlap in a variety of ways (with, for example, the first two tied by an association with Neoplatonism); and, together, they contributed to the general intellectual attitude of the age. After reading Dear's account, what would you say was the way to "learn things" in this era and how would you say it was different from our own?