Swiss Ephemeris

jmp jeanmichel at sequans.com
Wed Apr 12 07:55:45 EDT 2017


On 04/10/2017 07:29 AM, Deborah Swanson wrote:
> Fully recognizing that most of what you wrote was tongue-in-cheek, I
> just want to say that regardless of the wonders of modern medicine, it's
> a pity they learn so little about successful medicines other than their
> own. In other academic scientific disciplines such as physics and
> chemistry it's not uncommon to see history of science courses in the
> curriculum. But not in medicine. I learned what I know about ancient
> Greek science from a university physics professor, though I doubt he
> would ever have guessed that one of his students would someday breathe
> new life into that ancient science by attempting to ressurrect it. The
> great ancients were no less endowed with intelligence than we are, they
> simply directed it to different ends.

1/ success of medicine astrology is yet to be demonstrated
2/ history of science is about history, not actual science
3/ Ancients were probably as intelligent as we are, they just lacked a 
proper education and were filled with many false information

I can understand why people would study ancient medicines, I don't when 
they decide to consider it actual applicable science. It could be 
harmful in some cases.

But since it's done in Python, I guess we can let it slide :o)

jm




More information about the Python-list mailing list