There are three primary stances regarding the relationship between science and the church in the middle ages. Concerning the condemnation of 1277, Pierre Duhem argues that (A) 1277 marks “the birth of modern science.” Edward Grant and Richard Dales, among others, argue that (B) 1277 led to an “intellectual climate.” Conversely, a wide-ranging group of scholars beginning in the seventeenth century (including Condorcet, and Voltaire) have endorsed a “warfare thesis,” claiming that (C) the church is responsible for the “dismal state of medieval science.” I shall argue that A, B and C all prove to be inadequate. In the tradition of Locke and Hume, the criterion by which the arguments are adjudicated shall be the evidence found in primary sources. After all, “A wise man…proportions his belief to the evidence.” In the spirit of Duhem’s original thesis, I shall narrow the focus to the effects of the condemnation of 1277 in Paris. (first paragraph)

Included in

Philosophy Commons