Which of these should I look into and what criteria should I use to make my mind on a judgment After much thought, I realized some things: I cannot look at the results of the events since the effects are just enormous to be weighed by anyone; I also cannot look at factors such as the people involved and the efforts they have put that eventually led to the discovery or invention because again, such can lead to a chain of infinite events and circumstances. Hence, since neither its roots nor consequences may help in finding out which of the two events are greater, I had to look at some other viable criteria. Eventually, after going through the readings, I realized that there is one more avenue I never looked at. That is, the avenue of the relation between these two events! Simply, are the invention of the printing press and the discovery of the modern scientific method related at all, in any way The answer to that question, which is a yes (and I will expound on that in this paper), gave me also the answer to the debate going on in my head. There is a relation, and the relation is that of causality, one partially caused the other, making the other partially dependent on that which caused it. At least for these two, the answer was not difficult to find: the printing press acted as partial material cause for the eventual coming of the modern scientific method. So, at least within the philosophical realm of instrumental causality, the invention of the printing press has primacy over the discovery of the scientific method. With this, my question for those who would say otherwise would be: Would the modern scientific method, as we know it, be possible if not for the partial material causality provided by the printing press
Given my main question whose answer rest I now provide my thesis statement: The printing press, being an instrumental cause of some of the great developments in the west (including the discovery of the scientific method) from the time of its invention to the present, makes the invention of the press a more important historical event than the discovery of the modern scientific method. To be able to prove my thesis statement, I will divide the discussions of this paper into three parts: The printing press is an instrumental cause of some of the great developments in the West; the printing press is an instrumental cause even of the scientific method; Conclusion.
The Printing Press is an Instrumental Cause of the Developments in the West
At the invention of the printing press in 1440 came other developments as well: the exploration age, the renaissance, the reformation, the initiation of the information age, and of course, the modern scientific period. In this part of the essay, I will show how the printing press was an instrumental cause of these developments. But before I proceed, I will first define what an instrumental cause is.
An instrumental cause, according to Aristotle, is an aid to an efficient cause in coming up with an effect. So for example, the brush and other things