A scientific paradigm may be defined as a set of discoveries and achievements recognized and accepted by the scientific community at a given moment in time. A scientific paradigm offers practitioners the most workable models and solutions available, given the circumstances. One may safely assume that as science advances, new scientific paradigms emerge and replace their predecessors. Yet, such inheritance is arbitrary and not linear as it is possible for several different scientific paradigms to exist within the same time frame. The question arises as to what characterizes a paradigm shift. This essay will define the said phenomenon and also discuss the questions of objectivity and knowledge creation.
Main body
A paradigm shift is a radical change in the fundamental concepts and practices within a given scientific discipline. According to Kuhn, a paradigm shift makes part of the scientific revolution and is contrasted to normal scientific activities (10). The latter derive rules, guidelines, and practices from the existing paradigm and take place within its framework. However, the history of humankind has seen many occurrences when scientists are confronted with abnormalities that could not be explained within the present paradigm.
During a state of crisis, a scientific community may develop a solution that would constitute an achievement. Admittedly, not any achievement has the potential of laying a foundation for a new scientific paradigm for it should possess two essential characteristics. First, it needs to be unprecedented, and second, it needs to leave the opportunity for open-ended questions and issues to be resolved further (Kuhn 10). When new knowledge is obtained, a conversion may occur finally.
In his book “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,” Kuhn emphasizes the importance of studying the history of scientific thought. He draws a comparison between students who study humanities and those who major in natural sciences. Kuhn dislikes the fact that the former are offered a variety of approaches to understanding the world whereas the latter only deals with dry facts. The author claims that as overwhelming as it might be, the only abundance of theories and ideas helps an individual develop critical thinking and the ability to evaluate the validity of concepts independently (5). Examining the history of scientific thought teaches an individual to appreciate the pluralism of opinions.
The book in question also contains valuable observations on the nature of knowledge creation and objectivity. Kuhn states that such phrases as “scientific objectivity” and “scientific progress” may as well be redundant as to him, the very notion of science already includes these two characteristics (162). At the same time, the author disparages the viability of acquiring the only full objective account of nature as the ultimate goal. Kuhn is convinced that true knowledge creation happens when the evolution of what humankind knows is substituted with the evolution towards what humankind desires to know (171). This idea relates to his account of modern education that only presents facts but does not compel to explore.
Conclusion
Studying the structure of scientific revolutions provides a reader with insights into the ever-changing nature of the scientific inquiry. The most important scientific advancements may be described as paradigm shifts in which the new knowledge changes the preexisting concepts and ideas radically. If one wishes to understand these processes adequately, it is only reasonable to study the history of scientific thought.
Examining the history of great discoveries and becoming familiar with various theories encourages an individual to be an independent thinker. Such a thinker would benefit from straying away from holding ultimately objective knowledge as the only meaningful goal. True knowledge creation takes place when humankind makes an effort to prioritize evolution towards what they wish to know.
References
Kuhn, Thomas S. The structure of scientific revolutions. 2nd ed., Vol. 2, The University of Chicago Press, 1962.
Modern science can be said to have its roots from the Copernican theory, though it was received with uncertainty by the Copernicans prior to the seventeenth century (Curd 3). Most of the scientists in the sixteenth century believe Ptolemy’s theory of Earth-centered astronomy, as well as Tycho Brahe’s theory of Geoheliocentric system. The reluctance of early scientists in accepting the Copernican theory makes their later approval raise a few questions about the other theories (Curd 3).
One big question posed by this shift of mind is why and when the Copernican theory gained approval over the Ptolemaic theory. Current reviews of the ideas previously adopted as explanations of the change of beliefs have been found to be unsatisfactory. The Copernican theory had been found to be more precise in its forecasts and clear-cut than the Ptolemaic, which is not the case today (Curd 3).
Reasons for accepting the Copernican theory
One of the reasons as to why the Copernican theory was accepted is that it satisfied the “taste” of people, who disregarded rationale and facts. This harsh conclusion by Thomas Kuhn was challenged by Zahar and Lakatos, who argued that the research undertaken for the Copernican programme was empirically precise (Curd 3). The empirical progression of the Copernican theory was based on its essential geometric configuration, which had adequate projecting capabilities.
Lakatos and Zahar later edited the conception of a novel fact, stating that it was not necessary for it to be unfamiliar, but it should not have been acknowledged in the formation of the theory (Curd 3). Glymour was also in support of the Copernican theory, compared to the Ptolemaic one, stating that the latter was objectively inferior. The superiority of the former theory was observed in its capability to validate and be analyzed by the facts of that time based on positional astronomy (Curd 4).
Comparing the Heliocentric and Ptolemaic theories
Support on the validity of the heliocentric theory has been from various scientists, like Millman and Hall, who found it satisfying before the discoveries by Newton and Galileo (Curd 4). The book on testing and confirmation of theories by Glymour looks at the two theories comparatively; that is the geocentric and the heliocentric theories.
Glymour and Zahar believe to have been contributors to the understanding of the heliocentric theory, in terms of its methodical logic, harmony and accord, as expressed by other authors like Rheticus, which is contrary to the belief that the theory was irrational, as put forward by Kuhn (Curd 4). One way to compare the two theories is by using the equation (1),
1/T p = 1/T e -+ 1/S p where T is the heliocentric period of planet P, Te is the heliocentric period of Earth and S is the time interval between successive episodes of retrograde motion as viewed from earth. When the planet is superior, the – sign in the equation is used, while + is used for an inferior planet (Curd 5).
Inferior planets are Mercury and Venus. The Copernican theory works with an excess of three planets on the superior side, while the Ptolemaic theory works with the superior planets only. The Ptolemaic theory also fails to explain the relationship between the motion of the planets and the solar component.
The Copernican theory offers various explanations unlike the Ptolemaic theory (Curd 5). One of the things enlightened by the Copernican theory is the progressively diminishing value of S, as the distance of the planet from earth increases, irrespective of the direction (Curd 5).
The limits of the Ptolemaic theory do not allow for the determination of the displacement of planets from earth. Aristotle defended one of the theories in the Ptolemaic theory that states that the period of a planet is proportional to the size of its orbit (Curd 6). In the heliocentric theory, the distances are obtained with reference to the distance between the planets and centre of revolution, which is actually the sun.
These displacements that are predetermined are used as a basis for the order assignments, which is an indication of harmony and order, characteristics of Copernican theory, and lacking in the Ptolemaic theory (Curd 6). Bases on the tests conducted between the two theories, the Copernican theory emerges as the better one with greater explanatory power. The tests were based on the same positional data (Curd 6).
The Tychonic theory
The Copernican revolution was defined as the change of belief from the Ptolemaic theory to the Copernican theory. The revolution was dependent on two decisions namely the denunciation of the Ptolemaic theory as untrue, and the recognition of the Copernican theory as correct (Curd 6).
The prudence of either choice is not explained by the positional data due to the effect of two factors namely the Tychonic theory, a third alternative theory, and the existence of vital drawbacks to the Copernican theory. The Tychonic theory was published towards the end of the sixteenth century by Brahe. This theory suggests a geoheliocentric array whereby the earth is static and at the centre (Curd 6).
The sun and the planets are said to revolve around the earth. Therefore, the planets have the orbit of the sun as their deferent, and their major epicycle is the heliocentric orbits. Unlike the Ptolemaic theory, the Tychonic system is comparable to the Copernican theory, both kinematically and geometrically (Curd 6).
The Tychonic theory is like the Copernican theory in that in spite of its two centers of revolution, it provides for the derivation of equation 1, and the calculation of the displacement of the planets from the sun (Curd 7). The Copernican theory had two main problems namely the perceptible proof that the earth is static, and the lack of noticeable stellar parallax.
These problems were unique to the Copernican theory, since the other two theories were geostatic. The scientists in support of the Copernican theory argued that the two problems were contradicting with the requirements of the theory, which are two terrestrial motions. The writings of Galileo, in the early seventeenth century were sufficient to disregard the Ptolemaic theory, though the issues in the other two theories remained (Curd 7).
Semi-Tychonic systems appeared in the 16th and 17th centuries and believed that the earth rotated, but did not revolve around the sun (Curd 7). The semi- Tychonic theory was accepted since it enjoyed similar merits with those of the Copernican theory, as well as its simplicity, which made sure to ignore the independent motion of every celestial body. This was especially beneficial in its acceptance after the discovery of Newton’s first law of motion, which defines the forces that maintain a body in circular motion (Curd 7).
Conclusion
The acceptance of the Copernican theory was supported by both observation and acceptance on its scale of rationality as was seen in the Tychonic alternatives (Curd 8). One deduction observed in the determination of the validity of the theories is that the scientists who support the law focus a lot of their energy and time to build on it, and therefore defend it from harsh criticism, and non-believers (Curd 8). The justification of any theory is only dependent on scientific analysis, to solve any mysterious questions and doubt in people (Curd 8).
Works Cited
Curd, Martin V. “The Rationality of the Copernican Revolution.” PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association (1982): 1, 3-13.
Most scientific revolutions involve the rejection of previously held views, which are proven to be incorrect, to adopt new ones that match newly gained knowledge. As such, it is essential that the new theory, as well as the facts it is based on, are objective and indisputable. The requirement raises the questions of scientific objectivity and legitimate knowledge. Findings that are not disprovable and are therefore considered facts may become invalidated as technology advances and new measurements become possible. As such, understanding of the core concepts of knowledge is necessary to understand paradigm shifts.
Scientific Objectivity
Objectivity is essential to scientific research, particularly in matters that are often too complicated to allow full analysis, such as medicine. Many studies are unable to obtain accurate results and have to rely on statistical data.
This information is prone to biases, both on the side of the participants and on that of the researchers. Understanding scientific objectivity is vital to considering the validity of gained evidence and the possible influences that may sway the conclusions of the study. Without it, one would be prone to making potentially untrue statements, thereby invalidating the value of his or her research and potentially endangering the work of any others who accept the results. To progress, science must be based on proven and accepted hypotheses, which makes the discussion and understanding of objectivity invaluable to it.
Paradigm Shifts and Legitimate Knowledge
A paradigm shift typically involves a denouncement of knowledge that was previously considered legitimate in favor of a new theory. This change often invalidates knowledge that was based on the old ideas, requiring either a complete rejection or a search for a fresh explanation for the findings in question. Kuhn supports this notion by describing the Newtonian revolution as partially destructive, as it required an interpretation of gravity that could be found nowhere (105).
Ultimately, despite the theory’s overall success, the question of attraction could not be resolved, resulting in a partial adoption of the new paradigm. The issue was later settled with modern tools, and in the meantime, the rest of the Newtonian physics helped shape modern physics more legitimately than what would be possible with the views held before his publications.
Notable Examples
The scientific revolutions that stood out to me the most are the Copernican and Einsteinian revolutions. The Copernican revolution is significant because it was not entirely scientific in the nature of its emergence. While the inaccuracy of the Ptolemaic system was a significant factor, it had been observed for centuries before Copernicus, and the approach still saw widespread use. According to Kuhn, factors such as pressure for calendar reform and changes in general philosophy contributed to the timing of the breakdown significantly (69). In contrast, the Einsteinian paradigm shift was entirely limited to the scientific field due to the complexity of the topic.
The scientists of the time formulated a variety of theories that came close to explaining the phenomena they observed that contradicted Newtonian physics but always had flaws. The situation paved the way for the theory of relativity, which is almost entirely without practical applications at the moment, but was accepted and embraced nevertheless.
Conclusion
Paradigm shifts are based on new findings and knowledge, which have to have an indisputable basis to be accepted by the scientific community. As such, scientific objectivity is an essential quality for research, especially since most of it can only suggest possibilities instead of stating facts. Furthermore, the concept of legitimate knowledge is mutable, with ideas based on old views requiring a re-evaluation upon the adoption of a new system.
Lastly, the Copernican and Einsteinian revolutions are notable examples of paradigm shifts. The former shows that scientific progress can be influenced and assisted by external factors, and the latter indicates that immediate practical influence is not necessary for a theory’s emergence and adoption.
Work Cited
Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed., The University of Chicago, 1970.
It is not a secret that the universe does not revolve around humans. As shocking as it might have sounded to pioneering science in Ancient Egypt or Ancient Greece, it is undoubtedly true. The Scientific Revolution, which occurred roughly between the 15th and 16th centuries, refers to a period of innovations in science and technology, the entirety of which had originated from the notion that the Earth is not at the center of the universe. While the shifts in scientific thought first started in the field of astronomy, they rapidly expanded to physics as well (Pacey & Bray, 2021). Nicolaus Copernicus, an astronomer of Polish descent, is rightfully considered the first to introduce some of the key ideas, which would later evolve into the full-fledged Scientific Revolution. The purpose of the following paper is to demonstrate exactly how an astronomical revolution grew to dominate physics.
The revolution is usually portrayed as a chaotic series of scientific discoveries. However, the roots of the phenomenon go back to the 16th century and the work of Nicolaus Copernicus. He was the one who challenged the traditional principles of astronomy (Pacey & Bray, 2021). As a result, the scientist single-handedly reputed Ptolemy’s geocentric system. Using the same data that would be available to Ptolemy himself, Copernicus proved that the sun is at the center, and not the Earth (Laskovaya, 2021). Apart from this notion itself, the Scientific Revolution was powered by Copernicus’ take on reality as it relates to any scientific theory. According to him, the role of astronomy is to examine physical systems. These revolutionary concepts are the foundation of the Scientific Revolution.
After the initial discovery, the scholarly community rapidly began to accept Copernican astronomy. Despite the strong opposition from religious leaders and the Christian church as a whole, the new hypothesis started to infiltrate the academic circles. As researchers used Copernicus’ findings and refined them, the utility of the concepts developed by the scientist became apparent to astronomers and astrologers alike. Numerous academics spent decades generating data, which would become crucial to not only strengthen Copernicus’ argument but disprove Aristotle’s system altogether. One of them is Tycho Brahe, who decided to reject both Copernican and Ptolemaic hypotheses (Giles, 2020). Brahe decided to utilize stabler and more reliable tools to observe phenomena over extended periods of time. As a result, his observations were continuous and highly accurate, ultimately leading him to revolutionizing science even further. The efforts of Copernicus’ successors were an outcome of the domino effect, which inevitably led to more progress and discoveries.
As scientists fought for the validity of Copernicanism, a series of important discoveries were made in the field of physics, prompting the Scientific Revolution to expand beyond astronomy. The systems, which dominated physics research at the time, were rooted in the notion that the Earth is at the center of the universe. The doctrine of physics was shattered as a result of removing humanity’s home planet from the central position in the cosmos (Pacey & Bray, 2021). In addition, the Earth’s motion trajectory around the sun was inconsistent in the context of Aristotelian physics. Thus, as Copernicus’ concepts started to reach the scholarly community of physicists, a new generation of pioneers in the field emerged. Galileo is rightfully considered to be the first member of such a generation because of his undeniable contributions.
In conclusion, it is evident that the Scientific Revolution is not a disarray of inventions and discoveries. In fact, it should be regarded as a complex process. What had initially been Copernicus’ attempt to examine the possibility of the Earth’s motion became the start of the revolution. As Copernican concepts began to enter the phase of infiltration, many academics utilized his ideas to make revolutionary discoveries of their own, thus leading to the revolution’s progress.
Neolithic revolution refers to an agricultural revolution that occurred between 8,000 and 5,000 BC, during which period the human way of life was transformed from historically practices that predominantly involved hunting and gathering to a form of agriculture that involved cultivation of crops and domestication of animals (Watkins).
Because Neolithic revolution finally led to a more established agricultural farming among inhabitants it eventually led to three major developments in the ways of life of the people, i.e. economically, socially and politically. These immediate outcomes of the Neolithic revolution are the main points of discussions that are going to be the major focus of this paper.
Causes of Neolithic Revolution
As early as 8,000 BC in events that were taking place in Melansia, the first efforts by man to practice agrarian based farming started taking place leading to the earliest recorded events where man was deliberately moving from nomadic way of living through hunting and gathering (Watkins). Over the next three thousand years or so this shift from nomadic way of life started taking place in many regions of the world spontaneously such as in Sub-saharan Africa and Asia among others.
The factors that are mostly attributed to this shift of way of life are many and varied and include change in climate, change in culture, population increase and natural evolution. One of the theories that attribute Neolithic revolution to climate change is referred as Oasis theory which claims that dry climate resulted in people settling around available sources of water (Watkins.
It is from here that they started taking the first initiative of farming and domesticating animals thereby departing from nomadic way of life which had started to become unreliable. Other theories suggest that population increase forced the early world inhabitants to ditch nomadic way of life to more stable agriculture methods which could be relied to provide enough food for the ever increasing community size (Wright).
Natural evolution of both humans and plants which enabled man to domesticate plants and animals is also attributed to the Neolithic revolution. It is unclear what exactly might have triggered the Neolithic revolution but it is most probable that a combination of all these factors eventually led to settled form of agriculture that man continues to practice to this date.
Consequences
There are three immediate impacts that Neolithic revolution had on the way of life to the early inhabitants; one, people started adopting permanent settlement as a result of the domesticated way of life. Two, there was rise of social classes occasioned by the need of the people to stay connected now that they were finally able to settle in one place and practice agriculture.
This is what led to social change because of the new social structures that are inherent in any community that get to live together. Finally, the two factors of social classes and settlements facilitated the early form of civilization among these communities that eventually led to political systems (Wright). The early economic practice that took place within a society setting was form of barter trade which can directly be attributed to agrarian based way of life.
Because community settlement led to specialization in various aspects of agriculture, the community members needed to invent ways that would enable them obtain what they didn’t grow or raise by trading what they had and it is from here that the economic practices starting taking shape. Lastly, the new social way of life that the community had adopted meant that the community had to develop laws and regulation that would ensure peaceful coexistent of all community members. This gradually led to structures of governance that formed that foundation of the political changes that eventually took place.
Works Cited
Watkins, J. Neolithic Revolution, 2003. Web.
Wright, G. Origins of Food Production in Southwestern Asia: A Survey of Ideas. Current Anthropology, 12:1 (1971): pp 447-477.
Science is an incredible way of finding and systematizing knowledge that helps humanity maintain a certain level and quality of life. Moreover, science makes peoples’ lives easier, faster, and safer. Due to technological progress, any individual can entrust intellectual brain planning, calculations, programming, forecasting, and many other actions. With the help of genetic engineering, people received drugs and vaccines, which is especially significant in current times, post-COVID-19 pandemic.
A bright example of a brilliant application of science is Luke Bawazer’s research. Luke is working in the laboratory at the University of Leeds and explores new material technologies from living organisms. Using the DNA of such inorganic materials like seashells, bones, and teeth, Luke Bawazer proved that with the help of synthetic biology, these new materials can replace current ones (Bawazer, 2013). Creating the same instruments and reducing the expenses can lead people to get a variety of technological tools with useful electronic functions.
However, some individuals believe in Intelligent Design and reject any scientific proof. Intelligent Design theory claims a creator with supernatural abilities made life on the planet Earth. The founder of the theory is Phillip Johnson who in the 1980s came to this idea after Darwin’s evolutionary theory was published. Nevertheless, if Darwin’s theory had a logical basement and it was proved on species of nature, Johnson’s theory is nothing more than a guess. According to Wilson (2005), the formulation of Intelligent Design is a default argument advanced in support of a non sequitur. Denying the ability of science to achieve new results and present useful and innovative solutions to society, humanity hinders development.
Supporters of Intelligent Design might embrace the scientific revolution and reject Darwin’s theory at the same time. In current conditions, it sounds more like utopia but what people can do is smoothen the gap between religion and technical progress. The majority of people that are not connected with science have a foggy image of what it is. People imagine science as a set of numbers and formulas and do not believe any creativity is needed to open something new. Jacob Bronowski in his essay “The nature of scientific reasoning”, proves the opposite and states that without creativity any scientist has the similar prospect of making a scientific discovery as an electronic brain.
The current issue of people’s unawareness of science leads to the lack of education programs, media, and government’s participation. Engaging humans in scientific processes and achievements can help decrease the firmness of their beliefs and give them a chance to technological progress.
Jacob Bronowski’s view on the scientific process echoes in Luke Bawazer’s research. Luke, for his research, uses knowledge from material science, synthetic biology, and chemistry. The idea that put attention to biominerals and their DNA cannot de called anything else but imaginative and creative. The patience and devotion to the process Luke used while discovering the key gene that encodes needle-like skeletal elements deserves respect. This creative process can encourage other people to new ideas and find motivation in their works. The results of such studies can lead humanity to a new level of life providing electronic devices based on inorganic products due to genetically involved technology.
Luke is also talking about science as a constant creative process of trying to find something new. Founding one gene and some profitable outcomes do not limit the research. One DNA can be cut on millions of pieces and studied from different sides in various conditions so that every gene has a try to give a unique material and profit to people and society. Talking about science from this perspective, it is hard to say that no creation is involved in its processes.
As societies have been changing throughout life, humans’ beliefs and moral principles have been varied. Same does science and its principles: there is a set of axioms that are followed to reach higher steps of the scientific process; however, some innovations and new achievements in this sphere can put under the question the “normal science”, how Thomas S. Kuhn called it. Kuhn (1970) described a shift of a paradigm, or a number of achievements that is well-known and unprecedented, as an anomaly that undermines the basic tenets of the current scientific practice.
In other words, science will always need paradigms; however, the development of it never stands in one place, the world keeps moving on. New creations and research lead to innovative rules and understandings that can put under the question fundamentalism of the paradigms. Humans have to be ready for these constant and rapid changes and accept them. Otherwise, there will not be a possibility to impregnate these achievements in everyday life.
Supporters of “natural” life and nonbelievers in science cannot be pushed to trust its results. Yet, they have to look around and count the number of technological tools they are using to make their life simple and fast. Cellphones, cars, electronic tools in the kitchen, computers have become an essential part of people’s everyday life. Without technology and its progress, humans will barely survive. Medical tests based on PCR, vaccines were created with the help of genetic engineering.
Combined oral contraceptives are used for contraception and treatment of various diseases caused by hormone disbalance. Rejecting all these achievements of science puts individuals back on the evolution path. Education and news spread by media can help break the myths about science and help people understand and respect it better. This is the key issue that needs to be solved in the way of rapidly developing technologies.
The Scientific Revolution can be enumerated among the greatest achievements by the humanity during the whole course of the history. It changed the whole perception of the world around us, and established new tendencies in social, economical and political developments. The period of the Scientific Revolution became the time when science became more significant in people’s life that religion which was never possible before. Such considerable change led to the new way of thinking spread among people including atheism and pursuing materialistic values rather than spiritual ones. Overall, evaluating the situation it should be stated that the Scientific Revolution helped humanity achieve incredible progress in different areas including biology, medicine, mathematics, astronomy, physics, and chemistry which made it possible for people to break free form the chains that the Church put on them.
First, speaking about the Scientific Revolution, it is important to give a definition to this important development in human life. The Scientific Revolution can be explained as a historic phenomenon which occurred between The Enlightenment and the beginning of industrialization in the end of the eighteenth century. The main characteristic of this period is unprecedented development in the area of science including such branches of science as biology, medicine, mathematics, astronomy, physics, and chemistry.
Among the key figures of the Scientific Revolution were Nicolaus Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Giordano Bruno, Isaac Newton, René Descartes, and Francis Bacon. Nicolaus Copernicus was a great mathematician whose counting enabled him to acquire the true understanding on the world’s organization. He realized that the Earth is not the center of the Universe or the space as it was stated by the Catholic Church. This important finding became central in changing people’s understanding of the world around them. According to Tarnas (248), ‘more than any other single factor, it was the Copernican insight that provoked and symbolized the drastic, fundamnetal break from the ancient and medieval universe to that of the modern era’. Copernicus’ work was continued by the efforts of Galileo Galilei who was not afraid to die for his scientific findings and the triumph of truth. Galileo Galilei realized that the Earth was not a flat and motionless platform put on some visible pillars as it was taught by the Catholic Church. ‘With Galileo telescope, the heliocentric theory could no longer be considered merely a computational convenience’ (Tarnas 259). This ingenious finding became the reason of putting him to the list of heretics by the Church, and public execution by being burnt alive. Giordano Bruno had a similar lot in life: he ‘was burnt at the stake in 1600’ (Tarnas 253). The revelations of similar importance were offered to humanity by Isaac Newton, René Descartes, and Francis Bacon whose names will have eternal glory through generations as ‘the birth of modern era’ was able due to their efforts (Tarnas 271).
The reaction of the Church to the development of science was more than outrageous. ‘With religion and science in such apparent contradiction…- there was little question for Church authorities as to which system would prevail’ (Tarnas 254). Being worried for the areas of its influence among the population, the clergy was determined to destroy any person able to threat its exalted position. The Church made mind-blowing profits by means of keeping people in the darkness and ignorance. The Church developed many ways of robbing people such as indulgences, taxes, and “free-will” donations. It was absolutely clear for the clergy that with the development of science, people would realize how cruelly they were deceived, and the robbery would end up. On this reason, the Church was desperate in murdering every individual threatening its position in the society. As a result, thousands of innocent people were martyrly executed by the clergy. Still, this did not stop people of free will and honest heart who dreamt about helping humanity to go out of extreme darkness of false religious teachings and aberrations.
The fate of religion in light of the Scientific Revolution was predestined. People learnt how cruelly and unshamed they were deceived by the “holy” people speaking as if they were god’s servants. In reality, the representatives of Church appeared to be liars and wheeler-dealers. The Scientific Revolution became a reason why so many people forgot about their faith in god, and became atheists fiercely fighting with the Church and its deceitful practices. After the Scientific Revolution, religion was never able to occupy such central place in human society as it had before. The era of the Scientific Revolution even caused formation of atheistic states in the centuries to come. In these atheistic states occupying significant areas, the very idea of faith in god was unthinkable. Similarly to the previous activities of the Church, the leaders of those states relentlessly killed every person claiming to be in connection with religion.
Concluding on the above-discussed information, it should be stated that the Scientific Revolution became a turning point in the history of humanity. With the development of such important sciences as biology, medicine, mathematics, astronomy, physics, and chemistry, the whole perception of the world has changed. Due to the findings of such ingenious men of science as Nicolaus Copernicus, Galileo Galilei, Isaac Newton, René Descartes, and Francis Bacon, people realized that they were long fooled and robbed by the Church. This became the beginning of the era of atheism in the human history.
Works Cited
Tarnas, Richard. The Passion of the Western Mind: Understanding the Ideas that Have Shaped Our World View, New York:Ballantine Books, 1993. Print.
Most individuals who wake up and do as they please without conforming to a set of suffocating guidelines consider having freedom normal. On the other hand, for some especially in the Middle East true freedom is unknown. For them, they can only follow guidelines laid out by the society and religion and do not have room to accommodate individual feelings.
In many Middle East countries, religion has boycotted freedom rights of individuals. It has entrapped them in cocoons they cannot escape. For instance, in Saudi Arabia, religion has swallowed up culture and tradition. The three have integrated to become one under the umbrella of religion. Islam, the dominant religion in this country acts as the guideline to how individuals should live. It has strict rules that suffocate the freedom of individuals.
As of now, Saudi Arabia is one to the countries known to have limited freedom. Religion spells out the freedom that individuals can enjoy. This religion favours men and undermines women. For instance, the Saudi tradition does not allow women and children right to air their opinions in public.
Further, women do not drive and can only go to school if their male guardians permit it. Women and men cover their bodies and head completely with women covering the face leaving only the eyes. In fact, the government has set aside a police force that oversees the implementation of these laws. These among other curfews imposed by religion and government suffocate individuals and deny them their freedoms as human beings.
The government and religious institutions should flex these stringent rules and be more accommodating of beneficial ideas. They should embrace technology and refrain from relating everything to Islam. Instead, they should seek to blend in with the rest of the world. They can achieve this through giving women equal rights. They should allow women to go to school and engage them in making decisions that affect them. The country should also consider teenagers freedom in the society.
In conclusion, Saudi Arabia should implement these and other suggestions provided by the international community in order to experience a positive social revolution. This would transform the country to an open-minded society with integrated individuals. Further, Saudi Arabia stands to gain more in social, economic, political, and cultural spheres if they increase freedom of expression, thought and worship.
The recent uprisings in the Middle East and the Maghreb have taken different dimensions. All these uprisings which were inspired by the Tunisian revolution have spread over to Egypt, Libya, Syria and Bahrain.
And just what began as simple uprising in quest for political rights and freedoms has led to the massive loss of lives in Syria, Bahrain and both the loss of lives destruction of property in countries like Libya. The Libya situation has taken a different dimension which threatens to put the stable country into anarchic situation.
States in the Middle East and the Maghreb occupy a geostrategic position in the global politics. Increased industrial revolution in Europe and the discovery of oil in the Middle East are the two main phenomenons that have increased the influence of these countries on the world politics.
The wealth and resources of the region have made it a safe haven and breeding ground for dictators who are interested in looting as opposed to social welfare of the people.
Bahrain is considered more strategic by the foreign powers. This has been evidenced by the availability of the USA’s fifth fleet and the United States naval support which places it in an important position. Bahrain has enjoyed long period of stability and this has made it a favorable financial hub.
Relationship between Bahrain and UAE
The strong ties between the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain is majorly because of the presence Sunni community of Muslim who are present in both countries though they are a majority in united Arab emirates and a minority in Bahrain.
The relationship between Bahrain and the United Arab emirates during this moment of Arab protests and crisis has been driven by two fundamental principles which guide the foreign policy of UAE.
First is that UAE is a member in good standing of the gulf cooperation council (GCC) and which Bahrain is also a member as evidenced the words of Anwar Mohammed Gergash, the foreign affairs minister of UAE who said “UAE’s decision represents a lively embodiment of its commitment to brothers in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC),”(Ministry of National Defense 1); and two, it believes in the peaceful settlement of issues.
The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) charter includes cooperation in all spheres from political, economy to military (GCC 1). The UAE’s foreign policy which provides for peaceful settlement of disputes and the principle of non interference (Government-Political System 1) also drives the conduct of UAE in the Bahrain crisis.
It is worth mentioning that the above two principles especially Bahrain’s membership to the GCC is considered critical and exceptional in the sense that as opposed to the other crises in the middle east, Bahrain is the only member of GCC.
This factor influenced not only the approach of UAE but also for other member states like Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar and Kuwait towards Bahrain. This is different as compared to the reaction of the same states towards other countries facing similar problems as Bahrain. An example is Qatar’s approach to Libyan crisis where it advocated for military intervention.
Notwithstanding the above argument, the overriding factor that governed the relationship between Bahrain and UAE and which has guided the approach of UAE towards the Bahrain revolution is the Sunni Muslim factor.
The uprising in Bahrain which began in February was aimed at achieving political freedom, civil liberties and democratic governance. It was considered a wake up call to the minority Sunni who had trampled upon the rights of majority Shia population.
The Shias were angered by the actions of the monarchy to import more Sunnis in efforts to increase their population. Since the Sunni are the majority in UAE, their interest in the crisis was more centered on the protection of their minority brothers.
The first response of the UAE was to send troops to Bahrain to maintain order and security (Eurasia Review 1). These forces together with the Bahrain forces have managed to suppress and crack down the opposition.
Besides the Sunni factor which unites both countries, the relationship between the two countries is also guided by the principle of complementarities. This is to say that both UAE and the Bahrain share a lot of geographic and demographic problems.
These include; they both have sheikhdoms, they lack adequate defense mechanisms and their vulnerability to the attack by Iraq and Iran makes them united in times of adversities (Cordesman 1).
Conclusion
In international relations, foreign policy and national interest are considered important instruments in global politics. The extremely different and radical approach taken by UAE in the Bahrain revolution as juxtaposed to the latent approach to the similar revolution in other Arab countries is a clear demonstration that relations among different states are merely driven by national interest.
This is also exemplified by the response of America, Britain and France to the Arab crisis. Whereas they have adopted military approach to Libyan crisis and economic sanctions in Syria, they have displayed reluctance to act in Bahrain and Egypt. US president Barrack Obama and secretary of state Hillary Clinton just issued plain warnings (BBC 1).
“Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali was born on 3 September 1936 in Hammam-Sousse, Tunisia” (Pierre para 1). In his teenage, Ben Ali got into the anti-French independence Neo-Destour movement. This made him be expelled from the schools that were under the management of the French. Ben Ali involvement with the Neo-Destour movement earned him a scholarship at a military school in France after Tunisia got independence in 1956 (Pierre para 2).
On returning to Tunisia, he joined the military security in 1964-1974, where he was the head of Tunisian military security. Ben Ali then quickly rose to the ranks and became the general in the year 1979, then the Tunisian ambassador to Poland in 1980 and the Head of national security.
He then became the minister of interior in 1986. In 1987, Ben Ali was then appointed prime minister by the president. His appointment in October 1987 later led to the ousting of president Habib Bourguiba in November 1987 after a successful coup d’ etat. Ben Ali then assumed the position of the presidency (Pierre para 2).
During Ben Ali’s twenty three year rule (1987 -2011), he first claimed to ease up on stern political measures concerning opposition movements, particularly the Mouvement des Démocrates Sociaux (MDS; Social Democratic Movement) and the MTI. His interest in multiparty system led to the signing of the national pact with opposition leaders in 1988.
Human rights activists, Islamic, and opposition leaders increased protests over the years since Ben Ali took power as president over his oppressive leadership. He manipulated and controlled the politics through his Constitutional Democratic Rally party. The key positions in the state and local government were held by the CDR party.
Ben Ali put into place changes in the constitution to ensure his presidency could be extended without limit through his party which held most of the parliamentary seats. He also allowed a few political parties and imposed strict rules and regulations to minimize opposition to his rule. His political party constantly held majority of the seats in the lower parliament during his political tenure; the ruling party had constantly won elections with a great majority over the five terms.
Hizb An-Nahdah, (Renaissance Party), an Islamist opposition which rose in the 1990’s led by Rashid Ghannouchi was banned and branded a terrorist organization. The Islamist opposition was believed to be a terrorist organization which was pushing for the establishment of an Islamist state according to the United States State Department in 2003. Ben Ali pushed the passing of the anti-terrorism law in 2003, leading to arbitrary arrests and cases of torture (Pollock para 9).
Repression was a major crisis faced in the country. Ben Ali often controlled the news and information in and out of the country. Journalists and human rights activists were constantly the target of police brutality and were subjected to surveillance by intelligence services.
Foreign journalists were often accompanied by an official from the Tunisian Agency for External Communication – this was done to control news and information flowing out of the country through any means including the internet. Despite the repressions, Ben Ali was still influential to the international organization due to his zero tolerance towards terrorism (Bembo para 7).
The first lady self proclaimed herself as the Arab’s most successful female politician. She frequently headed charitable foundations and promoted women rights. Ben Ali’s entire extended family – the Trabelsis, dubbed “the Mafia” and his associates indulged in lavish lifestyles at the expense of many ordinary Tunisians.
The Trabelsis openly engaged in corruption that led the North African country’s economy down to its knees. Ben Ali’s wife was known to be a shopaholic with frequent visits to western countries with private jets. Investors in Tunisia feared the long arm of the first family- they often took they want, most business deals did not go through without the involvement of the first family in the country.
Bribes were also collected for those who operated businesses in Tunisia. The Trabelsis owned extensive wealth including an airline, hotels, two radio stations, food distributions and more which are both locally and foreign owned. The Trabelsi’s was cited as the nexus of Tunisian corruption.
The Arab idiom – “The straw that broke the camel’s back” which means a pile of small things which causes failure. In Ben Ali’s fall, his involvement in corruption openly, nepotism and the flagrant abuse power and the system led him to his demise. Ben Ali had become a dictator to the Tunisians.
His extended family’s brutality and economic crimes had gradually angered Tunisians over the years. Saad Djebbar an Arab political analyst said that “Ben Ali was so arrogant that he undermined his own power base, alienating supporters in the party and the business community” (Zisenwine para 3).
The conditions in Tunisia led to ousting of Ben Ali – the high levels of unemployment, poverty, corruption and repression provoked Tunisians to detach themselves from Ben Ali’s oppressive leadership. During his presidency, he continually increased his internal security apparatus to neutralize any plausible threat. Intelligence was gathered through phone – tapping and the belligerent were threatened, beaten and assassinated.
Tunisia’s revolution might have been started by Mohammed Bouazizi who was aged 26 on 17th December 2010; he was selling produce illegally to provide for his family. When he was shut down for lacking a permit and he protested through self-immolation. This made Mohammed a martyr hence inspiring public protests against the government. Cases of Self – immolation and other forms of suicide become rampant over the months stirring more public protests.
As the government tried to crack down on the protestors by arresting and killing them, the crowds only grew more rapidly. Reports by the Tunisian government confirmed that at least 21 people were killed during the protests. Although the demonstrations were peaceful at that time, the police used excessive force to try to quell the protests.
Soon the trade union movement joined in the protests; this stirred the repressive response of the police resulting to more killings due to the union’s involvement. The union eventually embarked on a general strike which paralyzed Tunisia’s economic activities (Pierre para 4).
Media played a great role in the revolution of Tunisia and other North African countries. The ousting of Ben Ali was facilitated by the media through unearthing the real conditions in Tunisia. Most Tunisians were not conversant with the popular websites like Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo, Google, CNN and Aljazeera before.
The internet’s gain in popularity all over the world created a platform for the Tunisians to express their views and grievances. The advancement in mobile phone technology propelled the easy access and flow of information. The use of camera phones and the internet exposed the injustices instigated by Ben Ali’s government. Before Tunisia’s election in 2009, Ben Ali’s blocked Facebook for two weeks to minimize the spread of information.
Online censorship was frequently used to control information. Facebook and Twitter were used to circulate videos of each demonstration and to schedule the next demonstration. The internet successfully encouraged the ousting of Ben Ali. It made it difficult for Ben Ali to control information in the media. Therefore the media was able to expose the repressive nature of his administration especially the Aljazeera, which played a bigger role in covering the news in the early stages of Tunisia’s revolution (Pollok para 5-7).
After Ben Ali’s exposure, the international organization started withdrawing support from him. He had a good relationship with the United States of America since he was known for his strong fight against terrorism, this earned him leniency in the international organization.
In June 2008, the US congress donated aid to Tunisia and noted that the repression, restriction on political freedom and human rights violations were of concern for the relationship of both countries to strengthen. Later, president Obama said that he congratulated the Tunisian people for their “courage and dignity”. The U.S. offered a hidden helpful hand in the ousting of Ben Ali; they planned, oversaw and directed the revolution (Pollock para 9).
At the beginning of January 2011, Ben Ali grew cold feet when more protesters sporadically joined the streets in the capital Tunis. More deaths occurred when Snipers situated on roof tops and the army in the capital city killed the protesters. On the 13th of January 2011, the army withdrew from Tunis and consequently the Central Intelligence Agency called for the overthrow of Ben Ali.
Ben Ali and his family eventually left the country on the 14th January 2011 to seek refuge in Saudi Arabia. His family owned a lot of wealth which they got through a series of organized corruption. “They bled the country systematically” (Pierre para 7) says Nicolas Beau, co-author of the Regent of Carthage.
Ben Ali’s family constantly acquired wealth illegally and transferred the ill-obtained wealth abroad during his presidency. The French media reported that Ben Ali’s wife withdrew bars of gold from a bank in Tunisia before leaving the country. Most countries abroad have frozen assets belonging to Ben Ali’s family and allies since his exile. Some of his relatives were caught with cash and jewelry while they tried to leave at the airport.
Tunisia’s ousting of Ben Ali paved way to the second stage of the country’s revolution. Tunisia had a long list of pressing matters and among these were the questions on how to address these matters as they push for stability within the country.
These questions included issues regarding the political system along with initiating a reconciliation process to unite diverse political and social currents, and the issue of unemployment and corruption in the country. Indeed, Tunisia needed a ‘savior’ to salvage the country from the abyss which Ben Ali and his regime had thrown the country into.
An interim government was set up to lead the country. It immediately issued arrest warrants to Ben Ali and his family. In addition, his close associates were also detained. Although the interim government was in place, a few ministers and other loyalists of Ben Ali still held key positions in the interim government. These still fuelled a few protests over Tunisia’s revolution (Freeman para 2). They were undoubtedly enough reasons to make the Tunisian’s protest even after the ousting of Ben Ali.
Zisenwine (para 4) states in his article “An early step by the interim government to enhance national reconciliation” showed that the government’s interest in addressing public grievances. A three day national mourning for those who lost their lives during the protests was set up and the announcement of compensation of lost property during the riots was also made.
This further showed the interim government’s commitment for revolution of Tunisia. Former political prisoners were released and leaders in exile accepted back to the country, including the leader of the “Renaissance Movement.”
The interim government provided a roadmap to a free and fair election in October 2011. Previous holders of ministerial positions were replaced from the interim government due to the public’s unrest. This would go a long way in building public trust in the interim government.
The government established a 10-year vision for political action, as well as a 5-year economic revival program. Experts were allowed to manage the social and economic projects to tackle issues of employment, security, health and poverty with the new government. Revolutionaries were concerned mainly on drafting a new constitution which would protect their rights, which included a fresh electoral law, a free press and a good political system for the country (Bembo para 5).
Tunisia for the first time held a “free and fair election” in October 2011 since Ben Ali’s rule. Tunisia’s relation with the international partners has continued and a sense of freedom in the country is imminent. Most injustices have been addressed including the president’s term limits, a steady political freedom, a free press and an establishment of good economic policies.
Works Cited
Bembo, Pietro. Biographical highlights. The world’s perspective. 2011. Web.
Freeman, Colin. “Tunisia’s first family.” The Telegraph, 16 Jan 2011. Web.
Pierre, Tristam. “Profile: Tunisia’s Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali.” Middle East Issues. 2011. Web.
Pollock, John. “Green Revolutionary,” a profile of Norman Borlaug. Technology Review, January/February 2011. Web.
Zisenwine, Daniel. Telaviv Notes: An update on Middle Eastern developments. Moshe Dayan Center. March 27, 2011. Web.