Lindberg, D. C. (2007). The Beginnings of Western Science (2nd ed.). The University of Chicago Press: Chicago and London.
David Lindberg walks the reader through a specific historical narrative of western science. The subtitle reads, “The European Scientific Tradition in Philosophical, Religious, and Institutional Context, Prehistory to A.D.1450”. That subtitle is a mouthful, but essentially describes the effort of the book. It does potentially mislead. For example, there is a significant look at scientific knowledge and processes that enter Europe from Muslim middle east and African nations such as those learned in Spain as a result of the ‘reconquista’.
In particular, Lindberg makes s good case about assumptions and misconceptions about science, particularly medical science, in medieval Europe. Many think that time was clouded to thought as it is sometimes called ‘the dark ages’. In fact, there was medical advancement in the period both within the medical community, and through gleanings from the world of Islam. Lindberg makes it clear some advances were tampered in part by Catholic church authorities, but just as often what knowledge growth does occur is because church officials encourage exploration. In fact, many middle-age scholars were also clergy as they had time, access to libraries and resources, and instruction to read and interpret the information. Much of the experimentation of the time was instigated by this same clergy.
If past is prolog, Lindberg’s efforts to help the reader understand scientific support and obstacles could help today. He shows not only when religious dogma may have been at odds with so called advancement, but also where scientific dogma may have been more detrimental to itself. In fact, he shows how in many cases the church was more supportive of a relationship with science than practitioners were when it came to a relationship with the church. Just as we all need to be open to the ideas of science, so too scientific practitioners need to understand when their theories seem supported by evidence, such ideas are not automatically true. When scientific ideas become themselves dogmatic the risk is a ceasing of inquiry and knowledge growth.