![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
capri0mniToday, before I even got out of bed, and had breakfast, I learned about:
Tyromancy: Divination from Cheese!
Apparently, in the Middle Ages, people would write possible answers to questions on pieces of cheese, and the piece that got moldy (or the piece that got nibbled by a caged mouse) first was the piece on which the correct answer was written.
...And the thought occurred to me: if this were a controlled experiment (i.e.: all the pieces of cheese were from the same wheel, and the same knife was used to carve the answers onto each one), it could be surmised that the hypothesis being tested was:
"The Truth has an important nutrional value that can be recognized and reacted to by non-human species."
...I'm not saying it's a well designed experiment, or that its underlying suppositions are valid. But really, when you look closely at "old superstitions," what you really see are applied and systematic methods for understanding a complex world. And really -- that's Science.
Okay. I'm done spamming you for the day.
[ETA: I heard this on: The Splendid Table from American Public Media, it came during the last segment of the show: the trivia question of the week]
Tyromancy: Divination from Cheese!
Apparently, in the Middle Ages, people would write possible answers to questions on pieces of cheese, and the piece that got moldy (or the piece that got nibbled by a caged mouse) first was the piece on which the correct answer was written.
...And the thought occurred to me: if this were a controlled experiment (i.e.: all the pieces of cheese were from the same wheel, and the same knife was used to carve the answers onto each one), it could be surmised that the hypothesis being tested was:
"The Truth has an important nutrional value that can be recognized and reacted to by non-human species."
...I'm not saying it's a well designed experiment, or that its underlying suppositions are valid. But really, when you look closely at "old superstitions," what you really see are applied and systematic methods for understanding a complex world. And really -- that's Science.
Okay. I'm done spamming you for the day.
[ETA: I heard this on: The Splendid Table from American Public Media, it came during the last segment of the show: the trivia question of the week]
no subject
Date: 2011-01-17 03:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-17 04:19 am (UTC)Which public radio show enlightened you to this amazing fact?
no subject
Date: 2011-01-17 04:28 am (UTC)Actually, I was just about to go back and edit this. Because I do not believe that all systematic attempts to understand the world are science. That's the argument that Intelligent Design promoters try to make, and I don't want to be lumped in with them.
But I do believe that various forms of divination, specifically, can be understood as ancient forms of controlled experimentation. Whichever form of -mancy you choose (tea leaves, cards, yarrow sticks, buttered toast), what you're doing is separating out a finite set of variables, and carefully ensuring that only one thing is changed. Then, you look to the results of that change over time in order to discern the answer to your unknown. Or maybe you're looking for patterns of correlation that are significally higher than random chance.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-17 04:36 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-17 05:15 am (UTC)Hummm... can you please explain further about the ID promoters? I'd never heard that argument from them, and I have always been fond of the comparison between astronomy and astrology -- astrologers studied the skies so that they could learn about the gods and destiny, and even if their purpose was not scientific they still made observations that we find useful today.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-17 02:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-17 05:27 pm (UTC)Okay. To be fair, regarding Intelligent Design: this is my own interpretation of my understanding of what they're saying:
"Of course ID belongs in science textbooks! There's a logical reason for everything we claim [unspoken: based on our own internal assumptions of what Truth is], and we've thought carefully and systematically about everything we say. And besides, dinosaurs are just part of a theory -- you say so yourself!"
And so forth.
So I didn't want to suggest that all logical, coherent, systems of thought are scientific, per se. What makes something scientific is the method and the manner by which you approach the question.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-17 05:32 pm (UTC)Another spelling / version of this word is typomancy. I think that should be hijacked for a different form of divination altogether: fortunetelling from sloppy emails. ;-)