http://www2.evergreen.edu/christianroots/taxonomy/term/2/0 en http://www2.evergreen.edu/christianroots/nick-tasche <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">My question is derived from Aristotle’s ladder of nature theory (Page 67). Grant states that Aristotle was not an evolutionist because “He regarded species as unchangeable.”</font></p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> </font> <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Grant says that in contrast to evolution, Aristotle believed that “[living things] proceed little by little from inanimate matter to plants…plants in turn ascend by small degrees toward the animal world.”</font></p><p><a href="http://www2.evergreen.edu/christianroots/nick-tasche">read more</a></p> http://www2.evergreen.edu/christianroots/nick-tasche#comment Week 2 Grant, Science and Religion, ch. 1-3 Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:12:05 -0700 Nick Tasche 56 at http://www2.evergreen.edu/christianroots http://www2.evergreen.edu/christianroots/erin-gill <p>Hey all.  I have work in less than an hour, and realized that I would miss the 5 pm deadline if I didn&#39;t post <em>something </em>before I left.</p><p>My question is really only have formed, but my thoughts kept coming back to the few pages where Grant discussed medicine and the aquisition of anatomical knowledge (Pgs 62-65)  It mentions dissection and possibly vivisection as methods used to gain medical knowledge specific to the human body, but then goes on to say that dissection was a great taboo (due to the body being sacred), and the vivisections may have been performed on condemned criminals, who had no value.</p><p><a href="http://www2.evergreen.edu/christianroots/erin-gill">read more</a></p> http://www2.evergreen.edu/christianroots/erin-gill#comment Week 2 Grant, Science and Religion, ch. 1-3 Mon, 01 Oct 2007 12:29:12 -0700 gileri24 47 at http://www2.evergreen.edu/christianroots