Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

4th century suppression of the Greek intellectual tradition

Abrahamic religion, you know, the one with the cross...

Moderators: Blip, DarthHelmet86

Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#1  Postby Leucius Charinus » May 21, 2019 1:27 am

Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of the Greek intellectual tradition

See BACKGROUND: Charles Freeman's Books below.

Destroyer wrote:


I see nothing from those links to identify Tim as an apologist for theism.


That link indentifies an apologist attitude not for theism but for the Christian church of the middle ages.

Where has his identity been determined?


Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of the Greek intellectual tradition
https://historum.com/threads/defending- ... ion.53557/

Readers might recognise the usual attack dog MO used. Charles Freeman himself responded to this thread. The thread was closed as a result of the vitriolic exchanged. Freeman gave the thumbs down to the author James Hannam for his new book "God's Philosophers: How the Medieval World Laid the Foundations of Modern Science" Paperback – May 7, 2010, and making comments like this:

    Hannam is a Catholic convert (I have passed the other way) and he presents himself as an apologist (in the old sense of the word as "defender") for the positive role of Christianity in Western society.

    SOURCE: https://newhumanist.org.uk/articles/241 ... iety-prize

    Oneill hangs out on Hanamm's forum, denigrates Edward Gibbon and defends the glory of the church just like Hannam.

    Birds of a feather?

    I only hope that he gets wind of this discussion and returns to defend his position.


    Yes that would be lovely.

    He might like to start by responding to Charles Freeman's thesis about the decline in 4th century

    To this Oneill responds as follows:

      Greek thought in the west was stalling by the Second Century and dying out thanks to the disruptions of the chaotic Third Century. It barely held on at all in the collapse of the Fifth Century, but was preserved (BY the Church!) though the centuries of invasion and disintergration that followed until it could be revived and expanded on (BY the Church!) from the Twelfth Century onwards.

      The decline began before Freeman's Christian emperor villains came on the scene and the revival happened when Christianity was at the height of its influence. Freeman's ponderous, meandering, bloated book is a load of tendentious crap that skims over these key points.

      SOURCE: https://historum.com/threads/defending- ... st-1377076

      (1) Where does this mention the 4th century? (Answer: It doesn't).
      (2) But isn't it wonderful how the academics in the Church Industry preserved the ancient knowledge and saved the day?

BACKGROUND: Freeman's Books

(1) The Closing Of The Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason – 1 May 2003
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Closing-Wester ... skept01-21

The argument of this book is that the Greek intellectual tradition did not simply lose vigor and disappear. (Its survival and continued progress in the Arab world is testimony to that). Rather in the fourth and fifth centuries AD, it was destroyed by the political and religious forces which made up the highly authoritarian government of the late Roman empire.

(2) AD 381: Heretics, Pagans and the Christian State Hardcover – 7 Feb 2008
https://www.amazon.co.uk/AD-381-Heretic ... skept01-21
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 810

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#2  Postby Destroyer » May 21, 2019 6:56 am

Leucius Charinus wrote:Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of the Greek intellectual tradition

See BACKGROUND: Charles Freeman's Books below.

Destroyer wrote:


I see nothing from those links to identify Tim as an apologist for theism.


That link indentifies an apologist attitude not for theism but for the Christian church of the middle ages.

Where has his identity been determined?


Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of the Greek intellectual tradition
https://historum.com/threads/defending- ... ion.53557/

Readers might recognise the usual attack dog MO used. Charles Freeman himself responded to this thread. The thread was closed as a result of the vitriolic exchanged. Freeman gave the thumbs down to the author James Hannam for his new book "God's Philosophers: How the Medieval World Laid the Foundations of Modern Science" Paperback – May 7, 2010, and making comments like this:

    Hannam is a Catholic convert (I have passed the other way) and he presents himself as an apologist (in the old sense of the word as "defender") for the positive role of Christianity in Western society.

    SOURCE: https://newhumanist.org.uk/articles/241 ... iety-prize

    Oneill hangs out on Hanamm's forum, denigrates Edward Gibbon and defends the glory of the church just like Hannam.

    Birds of a feather?

    I only hope that he gets wind of this discussion and returns to defend his position.


    Yes that would be lovely.

    He might like to start by responding to Charles Freeman's thesis about the decline in 4th century

    To this Oneill responds as follows:

      Greek thought in the west was stalling by the Second Century and dying out thanks to the disruptions of the chaotic Third Century. It barely held on at all in the collapse of the Fifth Century, but was preserved (BY the Church!) though the centuries of invasion and disintergration that followed until it could be revived and expanded on (BY the Church!) from the Twelfth Century onwards.

      The decline began before Freeman's Christian emperor villains came on the scene and the revival happened when Christianity was at the height of its influence. Freeman's ponderous, meandering, bloated book is a load of tendentious crap that skims over these key points.

      SOURCE: https://historum.com/threads/defending- ... st-1377076

      (1) Where does this mention the 4th century? (Answer: It doesn't).
      (2) But isn't it wonderful how the academics in the Church Industry preserved the ancient knowledge and saved the day?

BACKGROUND: Freeman's Books

(1) The Closing Of The Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason – 1 May 2003
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Closing-Wester ... skept01-21

The argument of this book is that the Greek intellectual tradition did not simply lose vigor and disappear. (Its survival and continued progress in the Arab world is testimony to that). Rather in the fourth and fifth centuries AD, it was destroyed by the political and religious forces which made up the highly authoritarian government of the late Roman empire.

(2) AD 381: Heretics, Pagans and the Christian State Hardcover – 7 Feb 2008
https://www.amazon.co.uk/AD-381-Heretic ... skept01-21

I see that Tim O'Neill has indeed popped in to defend himself... Please let us see you address him directly.

ETA: Please take your accusations to him there, then you can refer him to your thread here. Otherwise he is likely to miss this. Your wish that it would be lovely for him to come and defend himself appears to have been granted.
Destroyer
 
Name: Patrick Mills
Posts: 1771
Age: 60
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#3  Postby RealityRules » May 21, 2019 8:31 am

... Oneill responds as follows:

    Greek thought in the west was stalling by the Second Century and dying out thanks to the disruptions of the chaotic Third Century.

Yes, of course events in the 2nd century were due to events in the 3rd .... /sarcasm
User avatar
RealityRules
 
Name: GMak
Posts: 2819

New Zealand (nz)
Print view this post

Re: Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#4  Postby Hermit » May 21, 2019 9:25 am

Creating a separate thread for discussions of debaters' personal aspects is a good idea. If Tim O'Neill has trouble finding it someone can send him a link via private message. With any amount of luck this thread will reduce the amount of shit-flinging that goes on in the other one.
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Posts: 2431
Age: 66
Male

Country: Australia
Print view this post

Re: Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#5  Postby RealityRules » May 21, 2019 9:28 am

RealityRules wrote:
lpetrich wrote:
RealityRules wrote:... it's questionable whether O'Neill really is the self-asserted atheist he says he is ...

Why might that be?

There're indications he's posted on another forum as a genuine devout believer as, when that posters posts were compared to Tim's posts, from various sources, via computerised text analysis, they were close enough to be the same person.

TimONeill wrote: ... Where? When? What the hell are you talking about? Who the hell did this "computerised text analysis" and, more to the point, why? And - most importantly - what posts of mine "from various sources" did they use? ...

So, evidence please. Let's see if this bizarre claim of yours stands up to critical scrutiny ...


>> https://vridar.org/2017/12/16/was-the-n ... ment-83829
User avatar
RealityRules
 
Name: GMak
Posts: 2819

New Zealand (nz)
Print view this post

Re: Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#6  Postby Spearthrower » May 21, 2019 10:34 am

So the 'evidence' is that someone claims to have performed an operation and concluded X.

Does anyone see any independently verifiable data there?

I know absolutely nothing about this Jimmy person, but I just read a post of his and it's immediately clear to me that the written style is nothing whatsoever like Tim O'Neill's based solely on being a literate person with many years of teaching and grading written assignments. As such, my analysis is clearly not going to convince anyone else, as my analysis is not actually quantifiable or transparent to anyone else... but I am not trying to prove something one way or another.

If you're trying to establish as valid the claim that Jimmy is Tim O'Neill's sockpuppet, you've got a damn sight higher bar of evidence to furnish than 'this dude said they did something and then said it was so'.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 24118
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#7  Postby Spearthrower » May 21, 2019 10:35 am

Incidentally, I think Mythericism is bollocks: so am I now a closet theist too?

Funnily, that's exactly what I've been charged with in the past by supposed freethinking atheists who lend credence to this crap.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 24118
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#8  Postby Leucius Charinus » May 21, 2019 12:35 pm

Destroyer wrote:I see that Tim O'Neill has indeed popped in to defend himself... Please let us see you address him directly.


What do you think this thread is about?

ETA: Please take your accusations to him there, then you can refer him to your thread here.


I left a note in the HJ thread. He's not blind.

Otherwise he is likely to miss this.


He's already provided his best arguments against Freeman's thesis. They have holes and blindspots in them as I have pointed out.

Your wish that it would be lovely for him to come and defend himself appears to have been granted.


He may just want to defend himself against RR's claim.

The claim that he, like his discussion host Hannam, is an apologist for the Christian church may not be significant.
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 810

Print view this post

Re: Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#9  Postby Leucius Charinus » May 21, 2019 12:40 pm

RealityRules wrote:
... Oneill responds as follows:

    Greek thought in the west was stalling by the Second Century and dying out thanks to the disruptions of the chaotic Third Century.

Yes, of course events in the 2nd century were due to events in the 3rd .... /sarcasm


His argument following other academics who attack Freeman and defend the church is that

(1) The decline of the Greek intellectual traditions began in the 2nd and 3rd centuries.
(2) Nothing happens in the 4th century worthy to be addressed or discussed. (eg: Constantine to Theodosius)
(3) The middle age church preserved the knowledge of the Greek intellectual traditions and "saved the day".

Each of these claims are false.
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 810

Print view this post

Re: Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#10  Postby Leucius Charinus » May 21, 2019 12:56 pm

RE: Tim O'Neill

lpetrich wrote:
Leucius Charinus wrote:
His home base is at James Hannan's Forum.
http://jameshannam.proboards.com/board/2/christianity

Hannam is a Catholic apologist.


In Scrutinizing Richard Carrier | The Quodlibeta Forum he slams Richard Carrier for believing in the "conflict thesis" (between science and religion), that Adolf Hitler had been a Xian, and the like.


RE: OP

Carrier and Freeman are both critical of the role the Christian church played in the middle ages.

At that same post he slams Carrier claim, basically the same claim as Charles Freeman, by saying that:

    "he [Carrier] claims Christianity stultified ancient learning rather preserving it,
    that there was minimal technological progress in the Middle Ages."

He defends the integrity of the middle ages church. He is an apologist for the church.

His posts and blogs are riddled with an uncritical use of ecclesiastical sources.

Does he defend the integrity of the TF?
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 810

Print view this post

Re: Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#11  Postby Destroyer » May 21, 2019 5:33 pm

Leucius Charinus wrote:
Destroyer wrote:I see that Tim O'Neill has indeed popped in to defend himself... Please let us see you address him directly.


What do you think this thread is about?.

This thread was constructed before Tim recently returned here to defend himself - not having posted here for years. So I do not accept that you expected him to just reappear simply because you opened a separate thread to make accusations about him...So I was basically letting you know of my delight that he was here in person to defend himself against your accusations - and wanting to be absolutely certain that he was made aware of this.

Anyway, having defended himself in the other thread, I don't realistically expect to see him waste any more time here.
Destroyer
 
Name: Patrick Mills
Posts: 1771
Age: 60
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#12  Postby Leucius Charinus » May 22, 2019 3:39 am

Destroyer wrote:
Leucius Charinus wrote:
Destroyer wrote:I see that Tim O'Neill has indeed popped in to defend himself... Please let us see you address him directly.


What do you think this thread is about?.


This thread was constructed before Tim recently returned here to defend himself - not having posted here for years. So I do not accept that you expected him to just reappear simply because you opened a separate thread to make accusations about him...


Well that's what happened last time. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.
He's already stated, and I've already summarised, his opinions.

Just a quibble but the thread actually deals with the (false) claims and accusations Oneill has made against the historical thesis in the books authored by Charles Freeman. If anyone is interested in discussing the issues of Freeman's thesis feel free to make claims or ask questions.


2008: AD 381: Heretics, Pagans and the Christian State - Charles Freeman

    Description:

    'We authorise followers of this law to assume the title of orthodox Christians; but as for the others since, in our judgement, they are foolish madmen, we decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious names of heretics.' - Emperor Theodosius. In AD 381, Theodosius, emperor of the eastern Roman empire, issued a decree in which all his subjects were required to subscribe to a belief in the Trinity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This edict defined Christian orthodoxy and brought to an end a lively and wide-ranging debate about the nature of the Godhead; all other interpretations were now declared heretical.

    Moreover, for the first time in a thousand years of Greco-Roman civilization free thought was unambiguously suppressed.

    Not since the attempt of the pharaoh Akhenaten to impose his god Aten on his Egyptian subjects in the fourteenth century BC had there been such a widesweeping programme of religious coercion.Yet surprisingly this political revolution, intended to bring inner cohesion to an empire under threat from the outside, has been airbrushed from the historical record. Instead, it has been claimed that the Christian Church had reached a consensus on the Trinity which was promulgated at the Council of Constantinople in AD 381. In this groundbreaking new book, acclaimed historian Charles Freeman shows that the council was in fact a shambolic affair, which only took place after Theodosius' decree had become law. In short, the Church was acquiescing in the overwhelming power of the emperor. Freeman argues that Theodosius' edict and the subsequent suppression of paganism not only brought an end to the diversity of religious and philosophical beliefs throughout the empire but created numerous theological problems for the Church, which have remained unsolved. The year AD 381, Freeman concludes, marked 'a turning point which time forgot'.

    [my formatting]
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 810

Print view this post

Re: Defending Freeman's thesis: suppression of freethinking

#13  Postby Leucius Charinus » Jun 02, 2019 6:22 am

DId the Christianisation of the Roman Empire in the 4th century cause a dark age ?


FWIW here is a summary made in 2017 concerning Freeman's thesis:

This summary consists of the following sections:

SECTION A: Defining the thesis and its refutations
SECTION B: A summary statement by Charles Freeman on what his thesis is about.
SECTION C: REVIEWS
SECTION D: DETRACTORS
SECTION E: CONCLUSIONS


Hope this may be useful for some. Comments are welcomed.



SECTION A: Defining the thesis and its refutations


Although Freeman's thesis is focussed on the 4th century, the background evidence being discussed ranges from the 2nd to the 11th century. Consequently, as long as the focus on the 4th century is not obscured, the way I see the opposing arguments at the moment may be summarised as follows by considering three time periods:

(1) 2nd/3rd centuries: Prior to 325 CE: primarily the 2nd and 3rd centuries.

(2) 4th century: The Christian Imperium and State of the 4thcentury (Constantine to Theodosius)

(3) 5th/11th centuries: The epoch from the 5th century to the 11th century (West and East)


The arguments relate to the question as to whether there was a decline (or progress) in "critical thinking" which Freeman associates with the practice (and preservation) of the Greek Intellectual traditions. Freeman summarises these follows:
Philosophy (and its major fields such as logic, metaphysics, philosophy of language, theory of knowledge, political philosophy etc), mathematics, science and the methods of doing science (other than experimentation), history, drama, rhetoric, political theory, astronomy, a scientific approach to medicine, all draw on ancient models of conceiving and analysing problems.


Freeman's thesis and the arguments of his detractors

Freeman's thesis and the arguments of his detractors for these three epochs are:

(1) 2nd/3rd centuries: Prior to 325 CE: primarily the 2nd and 3rd centuries.

Freeman argues that there was little decline in epoch (1)
He cites Plutarch, Galen, Ptolemy and Plotinus as "remarkable for their range and depth".

His detractors argue there was decline in epoch (1) as a result of various causes:
(a) "Romans were not much interested in science"
(b) Political and economic or [ADD CAUSE HERE} instability of the Roman Empire



(2) 4th century: The Christian Imperium and State of the 4th century (Constantine - Theodosius)

Freeman argues that there was a massive decline in epoch (2).
"Something dramatic happened in the fourth century".
He cites Theodosius as a central case.

His detractors have remained relatively silent on this.



(3) 5th/11th centuries: The epoch from the 5th century to the 11th century (West and East)

Here the argument is complicated a little by the fall of the western empire and the preservation of the eastern empire.
Freeman argues that there was a relative vacuum of progress in both the east and the west in epoch (3). "Opinion among historians of science and mathematicians is that this was a dead period in both east and west". Freeman argues that there was a decline and closure of "critical thinking" in the 4th century. and things stayed that way for a long time.

His detractors argue that whatever decline is perceived in the west in epoch (3) is attributable to barbarian invasions. They then argue that in the East, Byzantine scribes, furiously copying manuscripts, saved the day: "Science was preserved by Christians". [Ronald Numbers (Historian of Science)]




SECTION B: A summary statement by Charles Freeman on what his thesis is about.

The following statement by Freeman is derived from the Amazon Review page. Since it is not too long, and summarises many hundreds of pages, I have cited it in full


https://www.amazon.com/Closing-Western- ... 1400033802


Yes, there was a Closing.
By Charles Freeman
on March 24, 2004

    I am grateful for the care with which Amazon readers have reviewed my book whether they have agreed with my argument or not. The reviews are worth a reply.

    My thesis is that Christianity was heavily politicised by the late Roman empire, certainly to the extent that it would have been unrecognisable to Jesus. Note the linking of the church to the empire's success in war, opulent church building and an ever narrowing definition of what beliefs one had to hold to be saved. (Hand in hand with this went an elaboration of the horrors of hell, a radical and unhappy development which can only have discouraged freedom of thought.) My core argument is that one result of the combination of the forces of authority (the empire) and faith (the church) was a stifling of a sophisticated tradition of intellectual thought which had stretched back over nearly a thousand years and which relied strongly on the use of the reasoning mind.

    I did not depend on Gibbon. I do not agree with him that intellectual thought in the early Christian centuries was dead and I believe that the well established hierarchy of the church strengthened not undermined the empire. After all it was the church which survived the collapse of the western empire. Of course, Gibbon writes so eloquently that I could not resist quoting from him at times but my argument is developed independently of him and draws on both primary sources and recent scholarship.

    On the relationship between Christianity and philosophy I argue that there were two major strands of Greek philosophy , those of Plato and Aristotle. The early church did not reject Greek philosophy but drew heavily on Platonism to the exclusion of Aristotle. In the thirteenth century Christianity was reinvigorated by the adoption of Aristotelianism , notably by Thomas Aquinas. It seems clear that Christianity needed injections of pagan philosophy to maintain its vitality and a new era in Christian intellectual life was now possible. I don't explore it in this book. Even so, when one compares the rich and broad intellectual achievements of the `pagan' Greek centuries with those of the Middle Ages, it is hard to make a comparison in favour of the latter. Where are the great names? (The critic who mentioned the ninth century philosopher Erigena should also have mentioned that he was condemned as a heretic.)

    When one reads the great works of second and third century AD thinkers such as Plutarch, Galen, Ptolemy and Plotinus, which are remarkable for their range and depth, one cannot but feel that much has been lost in the west by the fifth century. Something dramatic happened in the fourth century. In 313 Constantine brought the traditional policy of Roman toleration for different religious beliefs to its culmination by offering Christians (who had condemned the pagan gods as demons) a privileged place within the empire alongside other religions. By 381 the Christian emperor Theodosius when enforcing the Nicene creed condemns other Christians as `foolish madmen..

    We decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious names of heretics . . .they will suffer in the first place the chastisement of divine condemnation, and in the second the punishment which our authority , in accordance with the will of heaven, shall decided to inflict'.

    If this is not a `closing of the western mind' it is difficult to know what is. It goes hand in hand with a mass of texts which condemn rational thought and the violent suppression of Jewish and pagan sacred places. There is no precedent for such a powerful imposition of a religious ideology in the Greco-Roman world. The evidence of suppression is so overwhelming that the onus must be on those who argue otherwise to refute it.

    Some readers have related my book to the present day- I leave it to them to do so if they wish -it is important to understand ANY age in which perspectives seem to narrow and religion and politics become intertwined as they certainly did in the fourth century. After all American Christianity was founded by those attempting to escape just such political straitjackets. Christianity has never been monolithic or static. In fact,as my book makes clear, one of my heroes is Gregory the Great who, I believe, brought back spirituality, moderation and compassion into the Christian tradition after the extremes of the fourth century. It is the sheer variety of Christianities which make the religion such an absorbing area of study.

    I hope Amazon readers will continue to engage with my arguments whether they agree with them or not. Keep the western mind open and good reading! Charles Freeman.



SECTION C: REVIEWS

Stan Prager
https://regarp.com/2015/05/13/revie...t ... s-freeman/
Freeman reports: “Faith and obedience to the institutional authority of the church were more highly rated than the use of reasoned thought. The inevitable result was intellectual stagnation . . . The last recorded astronom­ical observation in the ancient Greek world was one by the Athenian philosopher Proclus in A.D. 475, nearly 1,100 years after the prediction of an eclipse by Thales in 585 B.C., which traditionally marks the begin­ning of Greek science. It would be over 1,000 years—with the publica­tion of Copernicus’ De revolutionibus in 1543—before these studies began to move forward again.” [p322]

Mark Edwards
The Closing of the Western Mind | History Today
The plot of this long book is simple enough: the Greeks of the classical age invented science, the Greeks of the Hellenistic age adorned it, the Romans tempered sovereignty with wisdom, until the classical tradition was swept away by the sudden victory of the Church, to be replaced by doctrinaire thundering, intellectual supinity and the forcible dissemination of a private myth. The narrative is clear and fluent, nomenclature is studiously precise, and every judgment is supported by appeal to some authoritative historian or quotation of ancient texts.
[pay wall]

Mary Beard
The Closing of the Western Mind, by Charles Freeman | The Independent
Did Christianity destroy rational thought for 1000 years? Mary Beard revisits classical conflicts
The real problem is in Freeman's stark opposition between the classical and Christian worlds. The truth is that we are only able to read most of the scientific triumphs of pagan antiquity because the hard-working monks of Christian monasteries chose to copy and study them. Thomas Aquinas may have "re-discovered" his Aristotle through Arab translations. But, by and large, we have Freeman's "irrational" Christians to thank for preserving classical "rationality" – and, for that matter, irrationality.


SECTION D: DETRACTORS

James Hannam
Review of Closing of the Western Mind
REVIEW: Charles Freeman, The Closing of the Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason
Bede's Library
Charles Freeman's Comments on Bede's Review.


Tim O'Neill
Armarium Magnum: The Closing of the Western Mind by Charles Freeman
REVIEW: Charles Freeman, The Closing of the Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason
Verdict?: Fundamentally flawed 2/5

Armarium Magnum: A Reply from Charles Freeman (of sorts)
A Reply from Charles Freeman




SECTION E: CONCLUSIONS

There is obviously a spread of opinion and critical reception of Charles Freeman's thesis. If anyone is aware of further REVIEWS or DETRACTORS available for review online please make a note of them.


Where to from here? Please feel free to discuss.


Were the Greek intellectual traditions, and critical thinking itself, suppressed
by the implementation of the Christian State during the 4th century CE?
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 810

Print view this post


Return to Christianity

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest