Medieval times - A enlightened era…

Many people refer to the Middle Ages as a “dark” era. But why do they say that?

The main reason is that during these ages research in sciences like mathematics, geometry, astronomy et cetera was not so intense as, e.g., in the era before Christ. But is that really bad? Do we need cold geometry more than divine inspiration? Do we need raw mathematics more than the acknowledgement of our higher essence? Do we need astronomy more than a reason to look at the stars?

Why is research in more humanistic issues “bad” and does not constitute “progress”? Why is the Enlightenment… “light”? Don’t forget that history is written by the winners. And the winners in this case were crude enough to verify their win by naming their era with a name which is synonym to Light!

Any thoughts are more than welcome!

It was called the “Dark Ages” in contrast to the Enlightenment, not the period before Christ i.e. The Greeks. There was still intense study during the medieval period, but it was clouded by religious dogma. Heretics burned at the stake and whatnot.

Granted that the victor, whether good or evil, writes history with favoritism, “hysteresis”. And evil tends to destroy all records whether accurate or not and that is what brings the blindness known as a “dark-age”.

An enlightened age is when Man happens to discover a significant truth or set of truths that helps him see more clearly how to accomplish his aims. But Man has never clearly seen the very highest purpose for any of his actions. The order of learning truth is very important. Many things can be learned that cause the inability to learn more in the preferred direction. Man is guided only by the immediate perceptions of hope and threat and whatever records might have survived his prior destructive confusion. And he has never seen “Heaven”.

Heaven is a hard thing to get a clear grasp of, difficult to define, difficult to obtain, and even harder to maintain. Once nearly there with Heaven somewhat in sight, his lust blinds him again and he loses sight of the delicate balance it takes to grasp his goal. But even once there, he must study it carefully in order to see how to maintain it because that is a new direction from merely trying to obtain it. And as he begins to focus on it with analysis in mind, he begins to lose it again because he didn’t obtain it by analyzing it.

One should not pursue the method for obtaining Heaven until one has a concrete definition for it, until he knows for certain what his highest goal really is. That requires something that Man is just beginning to learn how to do. By the time he sees what he should have done, he will be well past the time to be doing it and have to start all over with what little might remain from his prior confused convictions (assuming he survives it himself).

I’m pretty sure medieval people had more honor than moderns, generally speaking.

And what about scientific dogmas?
What about materialism which wants us all to be just “intelligent lifeless matter”?

I more focus to the fact that humanitarian sciences progressed much during this era. And this is something we really miss today.

What are ‘humanitarian sciences’?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_science

Psychology, Sociology, Art etc.

As opposed to physics, chemistry, arithmetic, what have you.

Aside from theology or philosophy of theology, those ‘human sciences’ did not advance significantly during the Dark Ages in Europe.

There’s an idea … ‘theology science’. :smiley:

The Dark Ages were the Early Middle Ages, up to (depending on context) about 1500. I honestly can’t think of much progress in humanitarian sciences in this period, outside scholastic theology - none of which had the slightest benefit to the very great majority of people. Most other humanitarian sciences (psychology, sociology, anthropology) simply did not exist, and would not for centuries.

The power system in the majority of Europe was hardline feudalism: a caste-system of hereditary power backed by slavery of the serfdom. The church was a profoundly corrupt political organisation by any standards you’d care to name, riven by nepotism, internecine feuds and even parallel papacies. Religious minorities such as Jews were routinely savagely persecuted, and heresies within the Christian church were worse if anything - the Cathar heresy led to tens of thousands massacred for their faith, and at the end of the period of “much progress of the humanitarian sciences” we get the Inquisition in Spain. At least they only killed a few thousand, which is progress of a sort.

At least they didn’t have to put up with science’s dogmatic vaccinations and antibiotics or the burden of free speech without the guidance of scriptural interpretation. And the monks sang nicely. [-o<

Hmm, well at least they won’t have been burning in hell for posts like this…

hey, that was the Islamic Golden Age.

And the Mayans were peaking in the early dark ages.

You guys got get out more.

I really liked the “Jews” argument. Sure… In modern times no one hunted down Jews… :sunglasses: