The Science Before Science

The Science Before Science

by Anthony Rizzi

Paperback

$19.95
View All Available Formats & Editions
Choose Expedited Shipping at checkout for guaranteed delivery by Wednesday, January 23

Product Details

ISBN-13: 9781418465049
Publisher: AuthorHouse
Publication date: 06/23/2004
Pages: 412
Sales rank: 540,393
Product dimensions: 6.00(w) x 9.00(h) x 0.92(d)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

See All Customer Reviews

The Science Before Science 3 out of 5 based on 0 ratings. 2 reviews.
Guest More than 1 year ago
Dr. Rizzi's book was an eye-opener for me. At last I have found someone who can help me to appreciate properly the insights of Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas. For so long I have heard that no real science preceded Galileo --- but that was difficult to believe because I know we moderns have a tendency to underestimate those who have come before us. Now I understand more fully the important of Buridan and others to the FUNDAMENTALS of science, which are not done with a microscope but are done with careful use of the intellect. More important than that though is the proper understanding of knowledge and how science works, and how modern physics has in a real sense lost track of its roots, and in so doing has lost its real power. Read this book!
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
The title is misleading. It is not a serious attempt at the philosophy of science as the title would indicate.  The title should either be "Catholicism before Science" or "Science through the eyes of Aristotle/St.Thomas Aquinas".   Dr. Rizzi' epistemology is merely a rehashing, or rather forcing, of the metaphysics of Aristotle and St.Thomas Aquinas onto modern science with the overarching goal of supporting a Catholic worldview. It wouldn't be so bad if Dr. Rizzi would be more forward about his attempt at apologetics rather than pass off his frivolous work as a serious attempt at the philosophy of science. About the only thing that resembles a serious attempt at the philosophy of science in this work is his contrasting of ontology vs empiriometric theory.  However, the rest of this work is riddled with breathtakingly bad reasoning.