The Colosseum

[caldrail]

Scientific by any measure? Not really. Some were good observers, others good commentators, but hardly scientific. Tell you what... I'll be generous. Let's include Galen as a 'scientific' person. Okay, that's one individual, out of how many Roman citizens over the generations?

 

Practical issues are by their nature unscientific. The various trades you listed were more concerned with application of experience and observation than logic, theory, and reasoning.

 

Military matters for instance were very much part of Roman culture but even then it was long experience swayed by fashion and barbarian influence, not some carefully thought out equipment schedule. The 'advances' made in military methodology reflected the adoption of trends observed by individuals with an intelligent but empirical grasp of what they believed would benefit Roman victory on the battlefield. I seriously doubt they pored over sheets of parchment over a hot quill trying to figure out what increment of technology would win victory over savages. They were of course more likely to believe, with some justification, that war was won by valour and the strength of a sword arm.

 

Engineering mastery that was employed in civil engineering wasn't theoretical either. It was no more than extrapolation of existing expertise held by those who had the benefit of learning much of it from someone else. I've done the same thing. I designed a bridge in my college days. I came second in the weight trials. No-one taught me about the 'science' of bridge building, I'd simply used what I'd seen in other real world efforts and made an empirical stab at it. I strongly suspect much the same was happening in Roman times.

[sylla]

Scientific by any measure? Not really.

Point taken; by any Classical Era measure or standard.

 

Certainly no one of them was a post-Popperian researcher.