The 500 year period starting around the mid-sixteenth century that marks The Scientific Revolution should be considered a scientific revolution, the starting point for many revolutions to continue from, and not the singular scientific revolution. Most people have some idea of what The Scientific Revolution was, but they rarely question how revolutionary this period truly was. The Scientific Revolution created a foundation for scientific thinking that was profound in it’s development but was not the most revolutionary event to occur. The Scientific Revolution created a completely new approach to thinking and considering the world around us, but the way natural sciences have developed and evolved today is hard to compare to those of the first Scientific Revolution.
The Scientific Revolution should still be considered “a” revolution, because it both challenged the institution of thought in place and and created a starting point for revolutions to continue from. In his lecture, Professor Cohen highlighted how a revolution can be broken down into two aspects: a revolt against a certain institution or a revolving movement. Scientists during this period were not destroying a structure of scientific thought in place before them, but instead they were building it. They provided facts and evidence that, while not as adequate or impressive today, provided unimaginable information to the world. Galileo, for example, completely defied religious institutions when he proposed the heliocentric model. Scientists today have further developed Galileo’s findings and theories in ways that have stretched even farther (almost literally into the universe), and these developments in astronomy and other sciences are equally as revolutionary. Religious standards and institutions, as first scientific developments began to solidify, were not accepting to new logic that proved their reasonings and explanations incorrect. This defiance of religious institutions is what makes the revolt aspect of The Scientific Revolution.
Furthermore, The Scientific Revolution represents a central point in time that science now has continued to evolve from. The simple creation of new standards was extremely revolutionary about early scientists arguments like Aristotle. What was really revolutionary was how these scientists like Aristotle set legitimate scientific arguments in stone. Many of the changes in science that made the period so revolutionary wouldn’t be considered very scientific by today’s standards, and that is why this period should be considered “a” scientific revolution that fueled many more singular spirals from it.